Armed Forces: Pay Review

Lord Astor of Hever: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Defence (Philip Hammond) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am pleased to announce that I have reappointed Ms Judy McKnight CBE as a member of the Armed Forces' Pay Review Body for a second term for three years and six months, commencing September 2012. This reappointment was conducted in accordance with the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments' guidance on reappointments to public bodies.

Freedom of Information Veto

Lord Wallace of Tankerness: My right honourable friend the Attorney-General (Dominic Grieve) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	On 31 July, I gave the Information Commissioner a certificate under Section 53(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 ("the Act"). The certificate relates to the Commissioner's Decision Notice dated 4 July 2012 (FS50417514). It is my view, as the accountable person for the purposes of Section 53 of the Act in this case, that there was no failure by the Cabinet Office to comply with Section 1(1)(b) of the Act by withholding information contained in the minutes of the Cabinet discussions on 13 and 17 March 2003 concerning the military invasion of Iraq.
	The consequence of my giving the Information Commissioner this certificate is that the Commissioner's Decision Notice, which ordered disclosure of extracts of these minutes, ceases to have effect.
	I was required to reach a decision in this case during the summer recess as a result of the statutory deadlines set out in the Freedom of Information Act. A copy of the certificate was laid before each House of Parliament on 31 July. I am making this Statement to the House at the first available opportunity.
	My decision to exercise the veto in this case was taken in accordance with the Act and the published Statement of Government Policy on the use of the executive override as it relates to information falling within the scope of Section 35(1) of the Act. In reaching my decision, I assessed the balance of the public interests in disclosure and non-disclosure of the extracts of the minutes and I considered whether this case met the criteria set out in that policy for determining whether or not this was an exceptional case.
	It was my opinion as the "accountable person" in this case, as well as the collective view of the Cabinet, that (1) disclosure of this information would be damaging to the doctrine of collective Cabinet responsibility and detrimental to the effective operation of Cabinet government; (2) the balance of public interest favoured the continued non-disclosure of the information; and (3) this was an exceptional case and met the criteria set out in the policy on the use of the veto.
	Having reached that conclusion, I decided to exercise the power in Section 53(2) of the Act.
	A detailed explanation of the basis on which I arrived at the conclusion that the veto should be used is set out in a statement of reasons which has been deposited in the Libraries of the House.
	This is the fifth time the veto power under Section 53 of the Freedom of Information Act has been exercised since the Act came into force in 2005, although this veto and another recent one (8 February 2012) followed previous vetoes by the last Government in respect of the same information. Since the Act came into force, central Government have released an enormous amount of information in response to FOI requests-including in July and October 2010 when the Government published Cabinet Office papers on the miners' strike and the minutes of the Cabinet discussion of the Westland affair.

Office of the Public Guardian: A Consultation

Lord McNally: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Jonathan Djanogly) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	On 27 July, the Government published a consultation paper seeking views on our proposals to digitise the services provided by the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG). This consultation reinforces our commitment to implementing the "digital by default" approach in public services.
	The OPG is currently undertaking a programme of reform that is designed to meet two key challenges. First, to reform its systems and processes in order to deal effectively and consistently with ever-increasing demand to register lasting powers of attorney-a trend that is set to continue with the country's ageing demographic. Secondly, to transform the way its services are delivered to the public in order to reduce bureaucracy, making its services to customers simpler, more efficient and more accessible. This will be achieved by making the majority of its services accessible online.
	Our consultation paper, therefore, seeks views on the following issues:the forms and application process for lasting powers of attorney;the language used to explain legal responsibilities;the role of certificate providers;the process for registering lasting powers of attorney;the role of named persons;how confirmation is given that a lasting power of attorney has been registered; the statutory waiting period for lasting powers of attorney;supervision of deputies; changing security bond provider;online payment of fees;access to the registers; andproviding an "assisted digital" service.
	The consultation will run until 19 October. Following this, it is our intention to make the necessary changes to enable the provisions to come into force in April 2013.
	Copies of the consultation paper are available in the Libraries of both Houses, as well as in the Vote Office and Printed Paper Office. Copies are also available on the internet at: www.justice.gov.uk.

Social Security Schemes

Lord Freud: My right honourable friend the Minister for Employment (Chris Grayling) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The European Commission has presented a package of four draft Council Decisions amending the provisions for the co-ordination of social security systems with Albania, Montenegro, San Marino and Turkey. The content of the proposals relating to the first three countries is similar and is based on an earlier 2010 package of amendments to the agreements with the six countries of Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Israel. As with the 2010 package, the proposals are based on Article 79(2)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU), which enables the UK to decide whether to opt-in to such proposals. In line with our approach to the 2010 package, the Government have decided not to opt in to the proposals with Albania, Montenegro and San Marino.
	The Government are committed to the free movement of workers within the European Union, and also to protecting the sustainability and affordability of our welfare systems. As such, the Government maintain the position that they do not wish to extend social security rights to third country nationals.
	The proposal to amend the Association Agreement with Turkey is based on Article 48 TFEU, which governs social security co-ordination for migrant workers within the EU and which is subject to qualified majority voting. The UK has consistently contested proposals with an Article 48 legal base in relation to third countries agreements, maintaining that the correct legal base for such proposals is Article 79(2)(b) TFEU which allows the EU to adopt measures concerning the free movement rights of third country nationals.
	The Turkey draft Decision follows on from similar measures based on Article 48 to amend social security provisions in the EU agreements with the EEA and Switzerland. Then, as now, we took the view that these proposals would have the effect of extending social security co-ordination rights to people moving between the EU and a third country and that the Article 48 legal base was inappropriate as it related only to free movement within the EU.
	The UK is currently seeking to annul in the Court of Justice of the EU the Council Decisions based on Article 48 in the EEA and Switzerland cases. A ruling is not expected until late in 2013. In the mean time, the Government intend to maintain a consistent approach to the proposals on Turkey, in line with the action taken in the EEA and Switzerland cases. We will continue to press for the correct Title V legal base to be applied to the Turkey proposals, and should the draft Council Decision on Turkey be adopted on the basis of a qualified majority before the Court has ruled on the EEA and Switzerland cases, we will take appropriate action including a further legal challenge if appropriate.
	The Government believe that a consistent approach is necessary in order to underline an important point of principle concerning the interpretation of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and to affirm the Government's commitment to protect our rights under the Treaty.

Arms Trade Treaty

Baroness Warsi: My right honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Alistair Burt) has made the following ministerial Statement.
	I would like to update the House on the outcome of the UN conference on the arms trade treaty (ATT) which took place in New York from 2 to 27 July 2012.
	The conference followed six years of work in the UN to secure a legally binding treaty to regulate the international trade in conventional arms. The illegal, or poorly regulated, trade in conventional arms costs lives and blights futures. More than 740,000 men, women and children die each year as a result of armed violence.
	The UK has led international efforts to secure an ATT over the last six years, and last month the UN conference came close to reaching an agreement on a treaty.
	The UK delegation was led by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and comprised representatives from the Ministry of Defence, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, the Department for International Development and a representative from the UK defence industry. The Minister of State, Department for International Development and I also travelled to New York during the negotiations to help sustain the momentum of the process. The UK delegation played a leading role in the negotiations, co-ordinating closely with civil society, and supported by Ministers and officials from across Whitehall and by the UK's extensive network of international posts. I pay tribute to all the individuals involved.
	Four weeks of difficult and complex negotiations led to a robust and balanced treaty text which the United Kingdom and the vast majority of other states felt able to support. However on the final day of the conference a small number of countries asked for more time to consider the text, meaning that the conference ended without agreement. As the Foreign Secretary made it clear in his statement of 28 July, we were disappointed that the negotiations did not reach a conclusion. However we recognise that to be fully effective the treaty will need broad and ideally universal participation.
	This is not an end to the arms trade treaty process. We are absolutely committed to securing a robust and effective treaty, and will continue to devote significant diplomatic efforts to this goal. We will continue our work on the basis of the draft treaty considered at the conference. The UN General Assembly will be the next opportunity for us to address the issue among the whole UN membership. While there is still work to be done, we remain optimistic that a meaningful and coherent ATT that will make a positive difference to millions of lives is in reach, and our goal will be its agreement during the next UN General Assembly session in 2012-13.

Aviation

Earl Attlee: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport (Patrick McLoughlin) has made the following ministerial Statement.
	International connectivity is vital to support economic growth. This Government have made clear that their priority is returning this country to sustainable economic growth and our aviation networks and infrastructure have an important role to play.
	The UK is an island nation dependent upon its transport links to the rest of the world for its prosperity. The aviation industry in the UK is extremely successful. It is a significant economic sector employing 220,000 directly and supporting many more indirectly and it contributes more than £16 billion of economic output. 35% of UK non-EU trade by value enters or leaves the country by aeroplane. Importantly the industry also provides this country with the global connections which our businesses need to sell their products abroad and which inward investors to the UK demand.
	The Government recognise the importance of aviation to the UK. It is taking forward the Civil Aviation Bill to reform the economic regulation of airports to further the interests of passengers and create a better environment for investment. It is implementing the recommendations of the South East Airports Taskforce, including a trial of operational freedoms at Heathrow airport to improve reliability and reduce delay. In July the Government published a draft Aviation Policy Framework (APF) for consultation, a framework which will set the high-level policy parameters within which any new proposals for airport development may be considered. The final APF will be adopted by the end of March 2013. Alongside the draft APF the Government announced a number of short-term measures to deliver operational improvements and boost economic growth within existing airport capacity constraints including £500 million towards a western rail link to Heathrow, a review of the UK's visa regime and the recruitment of 70 additional border staff at Heathrow.
	Today the UK is amongst the best connected countries in the world. Our airports, particularly those in the south-east, deliver direct flights to over 360 destinations, including those of greatest economic importance. London has more flights to more destinations than any other city in Europe, more flights to the important trading centres like New York, Hong Kong, and Singapore. The Government are determined to deliver a solution which will continue to provide that connectivity in the short, medium and longer term.
	This is a very difficult debate, but the reality is that since the 1960s Britain has failed to keep pace with our international competitors in addressing long-term aviation capacity and connectivity needs. Germany, France and the Netherlands have all grown their capacity more extensively than the UK over the years, and so are better equipped, now and in the future, to connect with the fast-growing markets of emerging economies. The consequences are clear. Our largest airport and our only hub airport-Heathrow-is already operating at capacity. Gatwick, the world's busiest single-runway airport, will be full early in the next decade, while spare capacity at Stansted airport is forecast to run out in the early 2030s.
	The Government believe that maintaining the UK's status as a leading global aviation hub is fundamental to our long-term international competitiveness. But the Government are also mindful of the need to take full account of the social, environmental and other impacts of any expansion in airport capacity.
	Successive Governments have sought to develop a credible long-term aviation policy to meet the international connectivity needs of the UK. In each case the policy has failed for want of trust in the process, consensus on the evidence upon which the policy was based and the difficulty of sustaining a challenging long-term policy through a change of Government. The country cannot afford for this failure to continue.
	The Government have asked Sir Howard Davies to chair an independent commission tasked with identifying and recommending to the Government options for maintaining this country's status as an international hub for aviation.
	The commission will:
	examine the scale and timing of any requirement for additional capacity to maintain the UK's position as Europe's most important aviation hub; andidentify and evaluate how any need for additional capacity should be met in the short, medium and long term.
	In doing so, the commission will provide an interim report to the Government no later than the end of 2013 setting out:
	its assessment of the evidence on the nature, scale and timing of the steps needed to maintain the UK's global hub status; and its recommendation(s) for immediate actions to improve the use of existing runway capacity in the next five years-consistent with credible long-term options.
	The commission will then publish by the summer of 2015 a final report, for consideration by the Government and Opposition parties, containing:
	its assessment of the options for meeting the UK's international connectivity needs, including their economic, social and environmental impact;its recommendation(s) for the optimum approach to meeting any need;its recommendation(s) for ensuring that the need is met as expeditiously as practicable within the required timescale; andmaterials to support the Government in preparing a national policy statement to accelerate the resolution of any future planning application(s).
	A decision on whether to support any of the recommendations contained in the final report will be taken by the next Government.
	The Government intend this independent commission to be part of a process that is fair and open and that takes account of the views of passengers and residents as well as the aviation industry, business, local and devolved government and environmental groups. We would like, if possible, to involve the opposition as part of our work alongside Sir Howard to finalise the arrangements for the commission. I will provide Parliament with further details on the full membership of the commission and the terms of reference for its work shortly.

Bilateral Loan to Ireland

Lord Sassoon: My right honourable friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Mr Mark Hoban) has made the following ministerial Statement.
	I would like to update the House on the loan to Ireland.
	Ireland completed the sixth quarterly review of its International Monetary Fund and European Union programme of financial assistance on 21 June 2012, following which the utilisation period for the fourth instalment of the UK bilateral loan began.
	Upon request, the Treasury disbursed the fourth instalment of £403.37 million on 1 August 2012, with a maturity date of 3 February 2020.
	The Treasury will provide a further report to Parliament in relation to the bilateral loan as required under the Loans to Ireland Act 2010 as soon as is practicable following the next reporting period, which ends on 30 September 2012.
	As my written Statement of 11 June outlined, agreement has been reached in principle on a new, lower interest rate on the bilateral loan to Ireland. This is subject to the loan agreement being revised to reflect the new interest rate. I will update Parliament once the revised loan agreement has been finalised and signed.
	The Government believe that it is in our national interest that the Irish economy is successful and its banking system is stable. The Government continue to support Ireland's efforts to improve its economic situation.

Brownfield Allowance

Lord Sassoon: My honourable friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Sajid Javid) has made the following ministerial Statement:
	The Government are today announcing that they will introduce a brownfield allowance for companies undertaking additional development in certain older fields in the UK continental shelf.
	This follows the announcement at Budget 2012 that the Government would introduce legislation in Finance Bill 2012 giving it the power to introduce targeted measures to support investment in brownfields. The Government also committed to engage further with industry on how any such allowance could be structured to unlock investment while protecting Exchequer revenues. This legislation was agreed by the House and was given Royal Assent on 17 July 2012.
	This allowance will encourage companies to continue investing in vital North Sea infrastructure, and to get the most out of ageing assets. It comes on top of the ambitious package of measures that the Government have already announced this year to support investment in the UK continental shelf.
	The allowance will shield a portion of income in fields with qualifying projects from the 32% supplementary charge rate, and will be available from the accounting period in which incremental production from the qualifying project is expected to start. A qualifying project will be an incremental project increasing expected production from an offshore oil or gas field as described in a revised consent for development which is authorised by the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) on or after 7 September 2012, and has verified expected capital costs per tonne of incremental reserves in excess of £60. Where a project forms part of a larger development, all elements of the development must receive authorisation consent on the same day.
	The field allowance for a qualifying project will be £50 per tonne of expected incremental reserves for projects with a verified expected capital cost per tonne of incremental reserves of £80 or greater, with a straight-line taper to no allowance at a capital cost of £60 per tonne, and no allowance for projects with capital costs below that level. The maximum allowance for which a single project can qualify will be £500 million for projects in fields paying petroleum revenue tax, and £250 million for other projects (i.e. maximum tax relief of £160 million and £80 million respectively at the current 32% supplementary charge rate).
	The Government will keep under review the inclusion of projects involving enhanced oil recovery using carbon dioxide. However, such projects will not initially fall within the scope of the allowance because of concerns around cost apportionment across the upstream/downstream boundary. Changes to the field allowance regime may be made by order. The Government intend to lay the necessary order before the House of Commons later this year.
	Further detail on how cost and reserve estimates are to be calculated for qualifying projects will be set out on the HMRC website and in the relevant secondary legislation later this year.
	The Office for Budget Responsibility will publish the full scorecard costings of this measure over the forecast period at the time of its autumn forecast. Initial estimations are that the change will cost around £100 million a year in the forecast period.
	As this is a new type of allowance, the Government will review its effectiveness in 2015 to ensure that the oil and gas fiscal regime continues to be structured in a way that stimulates investment while ensuring a fair return for the taxpayer.

Correction to Parliamentary Question 90451

Baroness Hanham: My right honourable friend theParliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Andrew Stunell) has made the following ministerial Statement.
	I regret to inform the House that the answer I gave to parliamentary question 90451 from my hon. Friend the Member for Thurrock (Jackie Doyle-Price) on 24 January 2012, Official Report, column 135W, could be inadvertently misleading.
	The answer should read:
	The housing health and safety rating system (HHSRS) allows local authorities to assess properties against 29 different hazards, including damp and mould growth. If following an inspection a property is found to contain a serious, "category 1", hazard, we would expect the local authority to take action in relation to the hazard. The assessment for whether damp is a hazard takes into account factors such as the state of repair of the dwelling, the extent of existing dampness and the effect it could have on mould growth, and the consequent potential for harm.

Dairy Industry

Lord De Mauley: My right honourable friend the Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Mr James Paice) has made the following ministerial Statement:
	During the summer, the UK dairy industry suffered a major crisis caused by price cuts and I would like to update the House on events since then. Original price cuts were withdrawn, whilst processors, producers and retailers held discussions.
	On Friday 31 August, industry leaders agreed a code of practice on contractual relationships in the dairy sector. This is a significant step forward. The code of practice is a robust and proactive basis for a more effective system of raw milk contracts that will provide greater certainty and clarity for all parties. It addresses issues of price, volume, timing of deliveries and duration, and it includes effective processes to analyse progress and review the impact of the code.
	The Government will continue to work with industry to build on this progress. We will shortly consult on key elements of the European Commission's proposals for the European dairy sector (the EU "Milk Package"). We will seek views on whether it should be compulsory for dairy producers and processors to have a written contract. But at this stage the Government consider that the new code of practice should be given proper time to take effect and deliver change for the benefit of the industry as a whole.
	The Government also recognise the value of farmers working together in producer organisations to improve their profitability through efficiency and competitiveness gains as well as increasing their negotiating power. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs recently announced that £5 million-worth of new funding will be made available for farmers to collaborate and to support business-led innovation. We will consult on the arrangements needed to implement dairy producer organisations and work with industry to encourage participation and secure the benefits of effective collaboration.
	The UK is one of the largest milk producers in the world. Dairy is the UK's single largest sector of agriculture and its future prospects are positive. There is growing recognition that real changes are needed at all levels of the supply chain to drive greater confidence, innovation and investment and take advantage of the huge opportunities that exist-in domestic markets and abroad. Over the last few weeks, dairy farmers and buyers have faced up to some of the most challenging issues currently facing the UK dairy industry and taken steps to address the problems that are hindering its development.
	There are potentially bright prospects for the UK dairy industry. Apart from Ireland, the UK has the best climate for growing grass in Europe and we should be producing more value-added products such as cheese, butter and yoghurt for the domestic dairy market. The UK currently has to import 50% of these products, which indicates that the sector is not yet reaching its full potential.
	There are also major export opportunities with emerging markets such as China, whose growing middle classes are crying out for dairy products. Early in 2012 the Government published a food and farming exports action plan to encourage more food and drink companies to venture into overseas markets. This includes supporting and encouraging businesses at home and promoting British food abroad and opening up markets.
	Securing a healthy future for the UK dairy industry is a real priority for the Government. We are confident about its longer-term prospects and the agreement of the industry code of practice is a genuine step forward which we support.

DCLG: Summer Recess Work

Baroness Hanham: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Mr Eric Pickles) has made the following ministerial Statement.
	I would like to update honourable Members on the main items of business undertaken by my department since the House rose on 17 July 2012.
	Reviving the nation's high streets
	Our high streets are at the centre of our communities, hubs of local businesses and drivers of growth. The coalition Government are determined to support them and create the best possible conditions to allow businesses to thrive and communities to prosper.
	On 20 July, my department published proposals to scrap restrictions that deter start-up businesses from using empty high-street shops. Removing these restrictions on a temporary basis for empty buildings would open up premises, which otherwise would make no contribution to the local economy. This will boost high street and local area regeneration helping encourage start-up businesses.
	On 25 July, my department announced a further 15 Portas pilot areas, which will be given a share of a £1.5 million fund along with dedicated advice and free support from established businesses to bring their ideas about the development of their high streets to fruition. This takes the total number of Portas pilots to 27.
	To ensure that no high street is left behind my department has also announced a £5.5 million package of support for 393 town teams to revitalise their high streets. All town teams from across the country will also be able to bid for a £1 million future high-street X-fund to reward the most effective and creative schemes to encourage people back to the town centres in 2013, and a £0.5 million fund to help access set-up loans for new business improvement districts. Applications opened on 30 August.
	On 1 September, my department announced new planning rights that will allow more flats to be created above shops without the need for planning permission. The change further streamlines the planning system, making it easier, quicker and cheaper for people to create new homes in existing underused space. It has the potential to help increase the amount of affordable housing and ensures better use is made of existing developed land. Relaxing planning restrictions on creating flats above shops can also help increase the vitality of town centres by increasing footfall and providing a boost to high-street regeneration.
	Supporting local enterprise
	By promoting enterprise, investing in research, creating jobs and giving people more skills we are sending a powerful signal that Britain is a top choice for inward investment and bringing local growth.
	On 24 July, my department announced £3.5 million of government investment for manufacturing innovation for the new High Speed Sustainable Manufacturing Institute in Essex. The institute will develop new and innovative ways to improve manufacturing techniques and increase productivity that will ensure Britain remains a top choice for investment. It is expected to generate £80 million to the local economy.
	The creation of a UK-wide coastal communities fund was announced by the Government last year to provide grants to support the economic development of coastal communities and help pay for projects that can transform and diversify seaside economies. On 14 August my department announced six seaside towns in the first round of successful schemes in England that will receive grants of up to £2 million each to use on projects that create local jobs, support coastal tourism and development and boost the inshore fisheries industry.
	Kick-starting stalled development
	Many Section 106 agreements negotiated between councils and developers at the height of the housing boom have become unviable, stalling development to the detriment of regeneration and the prosperity of local communities who would benefit.
	Stalled sites mean no new homes, no new jobs and no community benefits. On 13 August, my department announced that teams of expert intermediaries will be available to councils and developers, offering free-of-charge advice and support to prevent these agreements acting as a barrier to getting building under way.
	In addition, my department launched a consultation that proposes giving developers the option to ask councils to renegotiate Section 106 obligations if they were agreed prior to April 2010. Currently these obligations cannot be renegotiated for five years once a council refuses a request for voluntary renegotiation by a developer. Opening up the renegotiation process further will provide another new opportunity to help get developments back on track, provide affordable housing and bring wider benefits for communities.
	On 29 August, alongside the Department for Transport, Kent County Council and Dartford and Gravesham borough councils, my department announced a deal to unlock the development of 22,600 much needed homes in Eastern Quarry over the next 20 years, delivering as many as 60,000 jobs and bringing a brownfield site back into use. Builders could be on site as early as next summer with the first homes set to be completed by December 2013.
	Building more and better quality homes
	The design of an area has a significant and lasting impact on the quality of life for residents. This Government believe it is vital that local people have a say over how their communities look and feel.
	On 22 August, my department, along with Sir Terence Conran, British designer and entrepreneur, announced a competition launching in the autumn, to give communities a chance to design their own neighbourhoods. Communities will be invited to submit their designs in front of an expert judging panel.
	On 23 August, my department welcomed a report by Sir Adrian Montague recommending measures to boost professional investment in good-quality, privately rented homes to help meet the nation's housing demand.
	In April, my department launched a reinvigorated right to buy offering eligible tenants discounts of up to £75,000 off the value of their home, accompanied by a new commitment to build replacement homes on a one-for-one basis. To assist tenants in their right to buy on 23 July, we launched a new website and dedicated call centre to provide more advice, information and support.
	Strong, united communities
	This Government are committed to turning around the lives of 120,000 troubled families. On 18 July, we published a report highlighting the real-life accounts of troubled families that underline our approach to tackling the root causes of the problems faced by these families and bring about real and lasting change.
	6 August 2012 marked the anniversary of last year's riots. One year on coalition Ministers highlighted the ongoing work to restore communities. Millions of pounds have been made available to councils to quickly help reopen shops and rebuild affected neighbourhoods and we have ensured that the police continue to build positive relationships with those areas.
	In February 2012, my department announced a £10 million investment in Youth United-a coalition of the major youth volunteering organisations. Over the next two and a half years over 2,500 volunteers will be recruited to run 400 youth groups in communities across the country. Six months on, my department has noted the quick and enthusiastic take-up and continues to encourage work to support young people who want to have a real stake in the future of their communities.
	The expertise and excellence of the nation's voluntary and community sector supporting in the delivery of high-quality local services are valued by the local communities they serve. On 24 July, my department noted their huge contribution and wrote to councils to express gratitude for the positive way the majority are working with the sector and reminded local authorities of the ongoing need to ensure that the sector is not left behind when it comes to funding allocations.
	The Olympics brought together communities in celebration and sense of pride and support behind Team Great Britain and indeed all other participants. This continues during the Paralympic Games. Over the recess period my department took an active role in supporting the Games raising the flag outside the department and through ministerial visits and attendance at the games.
	Empowering local communities
	On 28 August, my department announced that £1.3 million will be made available from the £8 million tenant empowerment programme, help to give more power to communities over their social homes including through helping tenants learn the skills they need to engage and negotiate confidently with their landlords; forming tenant panels to come together to demand the best value-for-money services; or even to take control of local services themselves if they feel that they could deliver more for less.
	On 29 August, my department made available a £10 million fund to help councils ensure their communities are able to finalise neighbourhood plans for homes, businesses and facilities in their local area. Already more than 200 communities are using the new planning powers introduced in the Localism Act. Councils can now apply for grants of up to £30,000 for each scheme to help pay for the costs of getting plans in place. Payments will be paid to councils to help them support and advise.
	On 22 August, my department published guidance that gives local people practical advice on new ways to get access to less conventional sources of land and green space to grow their own food to take greater control of their local area.
	Abolishing regional planning
	Revoking regional strategies outside of London formed part of the coalition agreement. The Localism Act 2011 provides for the abolition of regional strategies in a two-stage process. The first stage is to remove the regional planning framework and prevent further strategies from being created, and the second stage is to abolish the existing regional strategies by secondary legislation.
	The strategic environmental assessment process is set out in an EU directive (directive 2001/42/EC). In March 2012, the European Court of Justice issued a significant ruling on the interpretation and application of the directive (Inter-Environnement Bruxelles ASBL and Others v Government of the Brussels-Capital Region). Following the decision of the European Court of Justice, in the light of planning policy and legislation that have been put in place since January 2012, in the light of the earlier consultation responses, and in order to be meticulous in observing the requirements of the directive, the Government are now updating the environmental reports and undertaking additional consultation.
	On 25 July, we published the first of the updated environmental reports for consultation. In the coming weeks my department will publish updated environmental reports relating to the proposals on each of the other regional strategies, so that those proposals too can be the subject of additional consultation. A full Statement is published the House of Lords Official Report, 25 July 2012, column 66 WS.
	Tackling repossessions and preventing homelessness
	Tackling the record deficit and ensuring that interest rates are kept down and mortgages are affordable remain top priorities of this Government. On 9 August, latest figures from the Council of Mortgage Lenders show that the number of homes taken into possession in quarter 2 2012 (April to June) had gone down by 11% on the previous quarter to 8,500. This is the lowest figure since the final quarter of 2010.
	We have some of the strongest protections in the world to safeguard people from homelessness. No single voluntary service, government agency, council or government department can prevent homelessness alone, but by working together we can make a big impact.
	On 16 August, my department published the Making Every Contact Count report giving councils, charities, health services and the police a blueprint to work together to ensure that families and vulnerable people at risk of homelessness are offered help early, no matter who they turn to first.
	In addition, my department announced a further £3.5 million to 21 homelessness charities to support help and accommodation schemes for rough sleepers and extend the No Second Night Out initiative to eight more areas-Manchester, Plymouth, Great Yarmouth, north Devon, Taunton, Gloucestershire, Chichester and Worcestershire.
	On 31 August, my department announced £160 million over the next two years in homelessness prevention grants-offering certainty that homelessness services will be funded to the end of this Parliament.
	This is in addition to the £160 million that has been allocated to councils over this and last year, which has been used to offer support to those facing the threat of homelessness.
	Ensuring fair play on housing and planning
	On 28 August, my department published new guidance for local authorities highlighting the range of legal powers they have to tackle unauthorised encampments and development. It is often thought that local authorities and other enforcement bodies have limited powers available to tackle illegal and unauthorised encampments and the nuisance that they can cause. In fact there are extensive powers, and timely action by local authorities can save time and money down the line before such encampments become established.
	On 31 August, in partnership with the Home Office, my department launched new guidance to councils making clear the wide range of powers at their disposal to clamp down on rogue landlords. Thousands of unauthorised sheds and outbuildings are being rented out illegally to vulnerable migrants by landlords who charge them extortionate rents to live in cramped conditions. Councils in the worst affected areas have at their disposal £1.8 million of central funding to help tackle the problem of rogue landlords.
	On 1 September, new laws came into effect in England and Wales to make squatting in residential buildings a criminal offence. My department has worked with the Ministry of Justice to highlight these new provisions. For too long, squatters have had the justice system on the run and have caused home owners untold misery in eviction, repair and clean-up costs. Hardworking home owners need and deserve a justice system where their rights come first-this new offence will ensure the police and other agencies can take quick and decisive action to deal with the misery of squatting.
	Saving taxpayers' money: Increasing transparency
	The department continues in its drive for open and transparent government. Following the introduction of a new localist standards regime, councillors are now required to register certain pecuniary interests, including trade union dealings on a publicly available register. Deliberate failure to declare interests could result in a criminal conviction.
	To help make sure the new approach is properly understood, on 1 August my department published a practical guide to implementing the new system and demonstrating how the new local standards strike a common-sense balance between electoral accountability and personal privacy. It clarifies specific issues like urgency of declarations; personal information safety; handling spouse or partner interests; and gold-plating.
	The coalition Government's transparency code for councils has already seen all local authorities publish their spending over £500 online and open every aspect of business up to public scrutiny, including tenders, contracts, senior pay, councillor expenses and voluntary-sector funding. On 15 August, my department announced it is now publishing all of its spend data over £250, a new low threshold in central Government.
	On 23 August, my department put forward new regulations before Parliament that will come into force on 10 September 2012 to extend the rights of people to attend all meetings of a council's executive, its committees and subcommittees. The changes will result in greater public scrutiny opening up councils to local online news outlets and disallowing councils from citing political advice as justification for closing a meeting to the public and press.
	Saving taxpayers' money: Tackling council tax fraud and error
	The coalition Government have worked with councils to freeze council tax for two years, cutting council tax in real terms. Since 2006 council benefit fraud and error have cost the taxpayer an estimated £1.1 billion-an average of around £3 million per council. On 28 August, I reminded councils of the urgent need to get to grips with council tax fraud to ensure they can fully support hard-working families and genuinely vulnerable people and deliver value for money to taxpayers.
	Government reforms are localising council tax support, putting councils in charge of the discount and giving them a stronger incentive to support local firms, cut fraud and promote local enterprise. Councils will be expected to save over £400 million a year when they begin running local council tax support schemes next year. Councils will keep all savings they can make from reducing fraud and error.
	In addition, on 28 August, my department published a consultation document which seeks views on proposals to provide funding certainty for local precepting authorities (such as town and parish councils), as part of the process for localising support for council tax.
	Saving taxpayers' money: Legacy FiReControl assets
	On 25 July, my department updated Parliament on the status of the legacy of FiReControl and the launch of a marketing campaign to ensure that the remaining FiReControl buildings are utilised to ensure value for taxpayers' money and achieve a localist approach to improvements in resilience. The full Statement can be found in the House of Lords Official Report, 25 July 2012, column 62WS.
	Saving taxpayers' money: Departmental savings
	I would like to update the House on the administrative savings being made by my department. Latest estimates suggest that the DCLG Group (i.e. the department and its agencies) is making a 44% real-terms saving against its running costs over this spending review period by 2014-15. This equates to savings of over £570 million by 2014-15, of which £420 million is from the closure of the government offices for the regions.
	This £570 million figure is an increase from the previous estimates of a £390 million saving. These savings reflect the coalition Government's agenda of decentralisation, ending the micromanagement of local government, the abolition of regional government and the broader need to tackle the deficit left by the last Administration.
	Ministerial correspondence
	I would like to put on the record my thanks to Lord Lexden for undertaking an informal review of departmental correspondence, providing advice on how we can improve the quality and style of ministerial and official replies to correspondence.
	Copies of the press notices and documents associated with these announcements have been placed in the Library of the House.

Family Courts: Expert Evidence

Lord McNally: The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Jonathan Djanogly), has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Written Answer given to the honourable Member for Birmingham Yardley (John Hemming) on 30 April 2012, Official Report, col. 1158W did not fully address the question that was asked. The honourable Member asked, pursuant to the answer of 25 April 2012, Official Report, column 920W, on "Family Courts: Expert Evidence", if the Secretary of State would bring forward proposals to allow non-legally qualified people who are not party to the proceeding to refer expert reports in family proceedings to regulators.
	The full answer is as follows:
	The Government have no plans to bring forward proposals of this kind. The Government do not consider it necessary, since it is already possible for someone who is not a party to the proceedings to refer an expert's report to regulators provided certain conditions are met.
	The Family Procedure Rules 2010 permit a party to the proceedings, or that party's legal representative acting on the party's instructions, to communicate information to another person where necessary to enable the party to make and pursue a complaint against a person or body involved in the proceedings, which would include disclosing an expert's report to another person for the purpose of pursuing a complaint about that expert. That person is then permitted (with the party's permission) to disclose this information to another person (who may, for example, be the regulator) provided it is for the same purpose. Neither the person to whom the information is disclosed in the first instance, nor the person to whom it is subsequently disclosed, need be legally qualified. The relevant rules (FPR 12.75 (3) and 12.75 (1) (c)) are set out in Part 12 of the Family Procedure Rules.

Fluoridation

Earl Howe: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Anne Milton), has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Department of Health is publishing a consultation on the arrangements for consideration of proposals on the fluoridation of drinking water today.
	The Health and Social Care Act 2012 provides that, from 1 April 2013, responsibility for consultations on proposals on fluoridation will transfer from strategic health authorities to local authorities. The proposals could be for a new fluoridation scheme or the variation or termination of an existing fluoridation scheme. The consultation document sets out options for the making of water fluoridation regulations under the Act on the conduct of consultations, ascertaining public opinion and the decision-making process.
	Our aim is to put in place a fair and practical way to amend powers for consideration of proposals on fluoridation schemes. The merits of fluoridation itself will be considered locally in accordance with the regulations. We welcome views and will use these views to inform our thinking on the regulations.
	A copy of Healthy Lives, Healthy People: Consultation on the Arrangements for Consideration of Proposals on the Fluoridation of Drinking Water has been placed in the Library. Copies are available to honourable Members from the Vote Office and to noble Lords from the Printed Paper Office.

Framework Agreement for Technical Support

Lord Astor of Hever: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Philip Hammond): has made the following ministerial Statement.
	I wish to inform the House that one element of the current framework agreement for technical support (FATS) contract signed in April 2012 will need to be re-competed.
	The Ministry of Defence (MoD) uses FATS to procure specialist technical support to its defence equipment programmes and it is also used on a limited basis by other government departments. Suppliers compete to become members of the framework; users then place specific tasks through the framework, as and when they arise, preferably by running further competitions between member suppliers. The first iteration of FATS was instituted in 2006.
	The fourth iteration of the framework, FATS4, was competed and companies selected to be members, with the framework commencing on 26 April 2012. The framework is broken into two lots. Lot one covers general support relating to materials, electrical/mechanical, power plants, IT, health, medical and transport requirements. Lot two relates to safety and duty of care areas such as airworthiness management, safety management, maritime safety, and technical support to platforms and weapons.
	Technical deficiencies have been discovered in the way that lot two of FATS4 was awarded. Errors have been found in the way the assessment of suppliers' technical capability, for lot two, was conducted and recorded. Some suppliers are therefore on the framework who should not have qualified and others, who should have qualified, were wrongly excluded from the process.
	As a result, I have directed that the MoD and other government departments must stop using lot two with immediate effect. The current situation is not fair and equitable to suppliers who bid to be included on this framework and, given that the areas affected relate to duty of care and safety, no risk can be taken over supplier capability. Contracts already placed under lot two will remain in place as none has been placed with a supplier in respect of whom any irregularity has occurred. Lot one is unaffected and will continue in use.
	Despite this setback, FATS continues to represent a useful and efficient route for procuring specialist technical services and a replacement framework to cover these requirements will be put in place, which we estimate will take around six months. During this time, the MoD and other customers will place their own contracts individually for their specific needs following normal procurement process. This process will be managed so that it does not cause any delay in delivering equipment to our Armed Forces. The renewed competition and interim arrangements mean that the effect on any one supplier's business is likely to be negligible.
	The MoD has written to all affected suppliers to apologise for this failure of process and to inform them of the action being taken. I have asked the director commercial of the Department for Work and Pensions to conduct an external investigation to identify how and why this happened and to make recommendations as to how to prevent similar issues in the future. If evidence is brought to light that proper processes have not been followed, then disciplinary action will be taken as appropriate.

Hargeisa British Office

Baroness Warsi: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague) has made the following ministerial Statement.
	I am pleased to inform the House that the British Office in Hargeisa opened formally on 3 September, in line with my intent to establish a presence in Mogadishu and Hargeisa as soon as local conditions allow. This office enables officials to stay in Hargeisa for short periods to carry out diplomatic work in Somaliland. Because of the security situation, this office will not have any consular functions, and we have not changed our advice on travel to the region. Staff are already able to travel and stay in our office in Mogadishu, where work continues on plans to reopen the embassy as soon as local circumstances permit.
	The new office in Hargeisa and future British embassy in Mogadishu are part of the expansion of Britain's diplomatic network that I announced to the House on 4 September, Official Report, col. 152. This involves the opening of up to 11 new embassies, up to eight new British consulates/British trade offices and the redeployment of around 300 extra staff in more than 20 countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa.
	I will provide the House with a further update on UK diplomatic representation in Somalia as progress is made.

Health: Education, Training and Workforce Planning

Earl Howe: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Department of Health (Anna Soubry MP), has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The House of Commons Health Select Committee published its report on education, training and workforce planning on 23 May 2012. We have today laid before Parliament the government response to the House of Commons Health Select Committee First Report of Session 21012-13: Education, Training and Workforce Planning (Cm 8435).
	The committee welcomed the overall direction of the Government's reforms in this area, including the establishment of Health Education England and local education and training boards, though it called for more detail and clarity on particular aspects. The Government's response highlights a great deal of progress that has been made in establishing the new system of education and training since the publication of the committee's report.

Health: Suicide Prevention

Earl Howe: My honourable friend the Minister of State, Department of Health (Mr Norman Lamb), has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Today I am publishing a new suicide prevention strategy for England.
	Preventing Suicide in England: a Cross-Government Outcomes Strategy to Save Lives has been placed in the Library. Copies are available to honourable Members from the Vote Office and to noble Lords from the Printed Paper Office. The document is also available at www.dh.gov.uk/health/tag/suicide-prevention/
	Over the last 10 years, good progress has been made in reducing the suicide rate in England. However, there were over 4,200 suicides in 2010. That is one person dying from suicide every two hours. When someone takes their own life, the effect on their family and friends is devastating. Many others involved in providing support and care will feel the impact.
	There is no single approach to preventing suicide. Effective prevention needs a broad, co-ordinated, system-wide approach, with input from a wide range of organisations. An inclusive society that avoids marginalising individuals, and which supports people at times of crisis, will help to prevent suicides. Government and statutory services also have a role to play through building individual and community resilience, ensuring that vulnerable people in the care of health and social services and at risk of suicide are supported and kept safe, and ensuring that we intervene quickly when someone is in distress or crisis.
	This strategy recognises the contributions that all sectors of our society can make in preventing suicide. In particular, it sets out to:
	reduce the suicide rate in the general population; andprovide better support and information to those bereaved or otherwise affected by a suicide.
	We have identified six key areas for action to support delivery of these objectives:
	reduce the risk of suicide in high-risk groups;tailor approaches to improve mental health in specific groups;reduce access to the means of suicide;provide better information and support to those bereaved or affected by suicide;support the media in delivering sensitive approaches to suicide and suicidal behaviour; andsupport research, data collection and monitoring.
	The strategy supports action by bringing together knowledge about groups at risk of suicide, applying evidence of what interventions are effective in preventing suicide and highlighting available resources to support action at local level. It therefore supports local decision-making, while recognising the autonomy of local organisations to decide what works in their area.
	One of the main aspects of the strategy, and one of the most significant changes from the previous strategy, is the greater prominence of measures to support families-those who are worried that a loved one is at risk and those who are having to cope with the aftermath of a suicide.
	In developing the strategy, the Government have built on the successes of the previous strategy, published in 2002. It has also been revised and strengthened following consultation on a draft strategy which ended in October 2011. I am grateful to the wide range of individuals and organisations that provided input to this work.
	The strategy has been developed with the support of leading experts in the field of suicide prevention, including the members of the national suicide prevention strategy advisory group, under the chairmanship of Professor Louis Appleby CBE. I would like to thank all members of this group for sharing their knowledge and expertise. Their continued support and leadership is central to our efforts to prevent suicide in England.

Housing and Growth

Baroness Hanham: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Mr Eric Pickles) has made the following ministerial Statement.
	The coalition Government's number one priority is to get the economy growing. We must create the conditions that support local economic growth and remove barriers that stop local businesses creating jobs and getting Britain building again.
	In November, the Government published a comprehensive housing strategy and we have rapidly put in place measures set out in the strategy to support a thriving, active and stable housing market.
	We are reforming the right to buy by significantly increasing the discounts available to tenants to buy their own home. We launched our NewBuy scheme allowing people access to mortgages with only a 5% deposit. And to unblock stalled sites with the capacity for up to 16,000 homes we launched the £570 million Get Britain Building fund. We also announced plans to dispose of public sector land with the capacity to deliver 100,000 homes, and invested £770 million in infrastructure for housing and growth through the Growing Places fund.
	Housebuilding starts across England were 29% higher in 2011 compared to 2009. But there is far more to do to provide homes to meet Britain's demographic needs and to help generate local economic growth.
	Increasing investment in the private rented sector
	The rented sector already provides good-quality homes for many young people, professionals and families. But growth has been constrained by the lack of large-scale investment. We invited Sir Adrian Montague to report on the barriers to institutional investment and intend to take up Sir Adrian's key recommendation. Today I can announce that we will be investing £200 million in housing sites to ensure that the high-quality rented homes that are needed are available to institutional investors quickly. And we will be establishing a taskforce to bring together developers, management bodies and institutional investors to broker deals and deliver more rented homes.
	The Government will also use their hard earned fiscal credibility to pass on lower costs of borrowing to support the long-term delivery of new rental homes. To give institutional investors the assurance they need to invest in this area we will be issuing a debt guarantee for up to £10 billion for this scheme and the affordable housing scheme set out below. Under the scheme, the Government will enable providers to raise debt with a government guarantee, where they commit to investing in additional new-build rented homes. From tomorrow, the Government will be inviting expressions of interest from companies wishing to benefit from the scheme. It is expected that housing associations, property management companies and developers will be among those to benefit.
	Affordable housing guarantees and tackling empty homes
	The need for affordable housing remains high. We will therefore be extending the use of guarantees to cover borrowing needed to deliver more affordable homes. Building on the success of the Affordable Homes programme, the Government will invite bids to provide up to an additional 15,000 affordable homes through the use of loan guarantees, asset management flexibilities and capital funding. We also intend to extend our successful refurbishment programme to bring an additional 5,000 existing empty homes back into use. In total we will invest another £300 million.
	Helping first-time buyers
	To complement supporting the rented sector, we also want to help those who want to get on to and move up the housing ladder.
	Building on our existing schemes, we will continue to support housebuilding and to help people into home ownership through NewBuy-making it easier to access a mortgage with only a 5% deposit. We are working with the Home Builders Federation and the Council of Mortgage Lenders to increase take-up and grow the number of builders and lenders in the scheme. I welcome Monday's announcement that Aldermore has joined the scheme-taking the number of lenders up to six, over 70% of the market. Homebuilders and lenders will work together on a concerted marketing campaign over the autumn to raise consumer awareness and understanding of scheme.
	We will also allocate an additional £280 million, with a matching contribution from housebuilders, to extend our very successful FirstBuy scheme to March 2014. This will allow up to 16,500 additional first-time buyers to purchase a home.
	Accelerating large housing schemes
	The need for new homes is acute, and supply remains constrained. There are many large housing schemes in areas of high housing demand that could provide real benefit to local communities once delivered. But large schemes are complicated and raise a wide range of complex issues that can be difficult to resolve.
	Building on success in working with Kent local authorities and developers to unlock major housing opportunities at Eastern Quarry in the Ebbsfleet valley, the Government will work in partnership with local authorities, scheme promoters and communities to accelerate delivery of locally supported, major housing sites. These will be sites where there is local support for growth, strong demand for new homes, and good prospects for early delivery.
	Off-site construction can create skilled jobs, improve the quality of homes and ultimately bring down costs. An industry-led group convened by the DCLG and BIS will look in detail at the barriers holding back the growth of this part of the sector and how increased use of such techniques can be incentivised. We will ask this advisory group of experts to prepare proposals by Budget 2013, with the aim of improving the efficiency of housing supply and unlocking high-value jobs in the UK.
	Thanks to the Government's credible fiscal strategy, home owners are benefiting from historically low interest rates. However, the private sector needs to be able to access both finance and land to build the homes we need. The funding for lending scheme, run by the Bank of England with the approval of the Government, provides strong incentives for banks and building societies to boost lending, including mortgages and loans to businesses.
	Getting surplus public sector land back into use
	In response to emerging conclusions from a review chaired by Tony Pidgley, chairman of the Berkeley Group, the Government will accelerate the release of surplus public sector land by strengthening the role of Homes and Communities Agency outside London through a targeted programme of transfers from other government departments and agencies. We will also work to accelerate disposals by preparing the land for market and providing a single "shop window" for all surplus public sector land. We will work with the Mayor of London with a view to developing a similar approach in London, and to resolve how other measures are delivered for the benefit of Londoners.
	Reducing planning delays
	To get more homes built-and more workshops, factories and offices-we need a planning system which works proactively to support the growth that this country needs.
	The national planning policy framework is a major step forward. It has been widely welcomed by business, and as a result of its positive influence we are already seeing accelerated plan-making and more positive decision-taking.
	We are clear that local people-and local authorities-must be at the heart of planning. The last Government tried top-down imposition of growth and unequivocally failed. The imposition of regional strategies built nothing but resentment, with housebuilding falling to its lowest peacetime rate since the 1920s.
	The Localism Act has put the power to plan back in the hands of communities, but with this power comes responsibility: a responsibility to meet their needs for development and growth, and to deal quickly and effectively with proposals that will deliver homes, jobs and facilities.
	Today we are announcing a series of additional measures to drive the effective implementation of these reforms and remove unnecessary bureaucracy that can hinder sustainable growth.
	Given the importance of efficient and effective planning decisions for the economy we need to ensure that, where there are clear failures in performance, applicants are able to access a better service. We propose to legislate to allow applications to be decided by the Planning Inspectorate, if the local authority has a track record of consistently poor performance in the speed or quality of its decisions. Planning is a quasi-judicial process: justice delayed is justice denied. It is unfair to all parties for local planning authorities simply to fail to make timely decisions on a planning application-creating uncertainty both for applicants and local residents.
	In support of this we will also require more transparent reporting of council performance on planning, and will be working with the Local Government Association to increase the use of planning performance agreements for major schemes-which commit both applicants and planning authorities to a clear timetable for determining proposals. In addition, we intend to give planning inspectors more power to initiate an award of costs in planning appeal proceedings, where it is clear that an application has not been handled as it should have been with due process.
	Swift determination of appeals by the Planning Inspectorate is also of critical importance. We will consult shortly on options to speed up planning appeals-and for a new fast-track procedure for some small commercial appeals. I have also instructed the Planning Inspectorate with immediate effect to divert resources to prioritise all major economic and housing-related appeals, to ensure applicants receive a response in the quickest possible time.
	I have also extended a measure that allows developers the chance to seek additional time to get their sites up and running before planning permission expires, for an additional year. This measure will cut the costs of getting developments back on track.
	Getting the infrastructure projects that the country's economic success relies upon under way as swiftly as possible is also a top priority. The planning regime for major infrastructure which deals with many of these cases is bedding in well and is bringing benefits through its streamlined and more certain processes. We want to ensure that this planning regime rightly focuses on the most important schemes while also extending the benefits of it to other forms of development which are of national importance.
	To achieve this we now intend to review the thresholds for some of the existing categories in the regime, and also to bring new categories of commercial and business development into the regime-making it possible for such schemes, where they are of sufficient significance, to be considered and determined at a national level. We will also work to extend the principle of a one-stop-shop for non-planning consents for major infrastructure, and amend the special parliamentary procedures which apply to major infrastructure to ensure they are fit for purpose.
	Reducing the cumulative burden of red tape
	It is vital that the affordable housing element of Section 106 agreements negotiated during different economic conditions is not allowed to undermine the viability of sites and prevent any construction of new housing. This results in no development, no regeneration and no community benefits at all when agreements are no longer economically viable.
	The Government estimate that up to 75,000 new homes are currently stalled due to site viability. Section 106 is an important tool to provide affordable housing and we welcome the flexible approach that many councils have already taken to renegotiating these agreements where necessary. The Government are also acting to get developers and councils around the table through their new mediation scheme. However, given the current imperative for growth, we need to do more.
	The Government will now introduce legislation, to be effective in early 2013, which will allow any developer of sites which are unviable because of the number of affordable homes, to appeal with immediate effect. The Planning Inspectorate will be instructed to assess how many affordable homes would need to be removed from the Section 106 agreement for the site to be viable in current economic conditions. The Planning Inspectorate would then, as necessary, set aside the existing Section 106 agreement for a three-year period, in favour of a new agreement with fewer affordable homes. We would encourage councils to take the opportunity before legislation comes into effect to seek negotiated solutions where possible.
	Alongside this, the Government are also consulting on legislation that would allow developers to renegotiate non-viable Section 106 agreements entered into prior to April 2010.
	There is concern that the array of local and national standards used in different parts of the country is complex and counterproductive, confusing local residents, councillors and developers. I am announcing today a fundamental and urgent review led by Government working with interested parties to rationalise these standards. This review will result in a clear plan of action by next spring, including legislative approaches if a significant rationalisation cannot be agreed.
	Supporting locally led development
	We have previously made clear the importance we attach to delivering new large-scale settlements. The recovery criteria already includes large residential developments. To align this with the call-in process, I will also carefully consider the use of call-in for major new settlements with larger than local impacts.
	To support locally led development, communities will share in benefits including the new homes bonus, community infrastructure levy contributions towards local infrastructure, and the financial benefits of business rates discounts and forthcoming business rates retention from April 2013.
	The green belt is an important protection against urban sprawl, providing a "green lung" around towns and cities. The coalition agreement commits the Government to safeguarding green belt and other environmental designations, which they have been in the new national planning policy framework. The Localism Act allows for the abolition of Labour's regional spatial strategies which sought to bulldoze the green belt around 30 towns and cities across the country, subject to the strategic environmental assessment process, as outlined in my Statement of 3 September 2012, Official Report, column 5WS.
	As has always been the case, councils can review local designations to promote growth. We encourage councils to use the flexibilities set out in the national planning policy framework to tailor the extent of green-belt land in their areas to reflect local circumstances. Where green belt is considered in reviewing or drawing up local plans, we will support councils to move quickly through the process by prioritising their local plan examinations. There is considerable previously developed land in many green-belt areas, which could be put to more productive use. We encourage councils to make best use of this land, while protecting the openness of the green belt in line with the requirements in the national planning policy framework.
	Helping homeowners improve their homes
	As a nation, we have great pride in our homes, and I want to make it easier for families to undertake home improvements: not just to cut red tape and strengthen individual homeowners' rights, but also to help generate economic activity which will support small traders in particular.
	I am announcing today a further package of simplification measures to remove red tape and ease the burden on local authorities. We will consult shortly on changes to increase existing permitted development rights for extensions to homes and business premises in non-protected areas for a three-year period. This will mean less municipal red tape to build a conservatory and similar small-scale home improvement and free up valuable resources in local authorities.
	Getting empty offices into use
	We have already undertaken a series of measures to make change of use easier, to help get empty buildings back into productive use.
	We will introduce permitted development rights to enable change of use from commercial to residential purposes, while providing the opportunity for authorities to seek a local exemption where they believe there will be an adverse economic impact. This common-sense measure will help the regeneration of our towns and cities. Our high streets will benefit from a greater resident population, increasing footfall and supporting local shops.
	This package of measures will ensure that the reforms which we have made to the planning system are implemented as effectively as possible, and that the planning system plays as full a role as possible in supporting local jobs and local firms.

Julian Assange Extradition Proceedings

Lord Howell of Guildford: My honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague) has made the following ministerial Statement.
	I am writing to update the House about developments in the extradition proceedings against Mr Julian Assange, and discussions on that matter between the United Kingdom and Ecuador.
	On 20 November 2010, the office of the Swedish Prosecutor-General issued a European arrest warrant for the arrest and extradition of Mr Assange, who is alleged to have committed serious sexual offences against two women during a visit to Sweden in August 2010.
	Pursuant to the European arrest warrant, police officers arrested Mr Assange on 7 December 2010, who was at that time living in the United Kingdom.
	On 24 February 2011, a district judge ruled that Mr Assange should be extradited to face proceedings in Sweden concerning allegations of sexual offences. Mr Assange appealed against the ruling, but on 2 November 2011 two judges at the High Court upheld the decision to extradite Mr Assange to Sweden. Mr Assange appealed again, but the Supreme Court ruled on 30 May 2012 that Mr Assange should be extradited to Sweden.
	Following the ruling of the Supreme Court, Mr Assange was given two weeks to seek to reopen the appeal. On 14 June, the Supreme Court dismissed Mr Assange's bid to reopen his appeal, and conferred a two-week grace period before Her Majesty's Government could begin extradition proceedings.
	Over this 15-month period, Mr Assange exercised fully his legal right to challenge the extradition procedure, with competent legal representation. Mr Assange took his case through successive independent judicial hearings to the highest court in the United Kingdom and in the process exhausted all options of appeal in the UK.
	On 19 June Mr Assange entered the embassy of Ecuador from where he asked for the protection of the Government of Ecuador. The same day, the Government of Ecuador informed Her Majesty's Government by diplomatic note that it was considering Mr Assange's request.
	Following this, I asked my officials to initiate a formal, regular, dialogue with the Government of Ecuador. This included seven formal discussions as well as many other conversations and written exchanges, in order to seek an acceptable resolution to this situation.
	Throughout our exchanges, we have noted that the rights of diplomatic missions conferred by the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations come with responsibilities. Article 41 of the Vienna convention sets out the obligations of diplomatic missions to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving state-in this case the United Kingdom. These include the duty not to impede the due legal process of that state.
	Furthermore, Her Majesty's Government have made it clear to Ecuador that we recognise that Ecuador and a number of countries in Latin America are party to the Caracas Convention on Diplomatic Asylum of 1954, and that that convention provides the right, between its state parties, to grant diplomatic asylum in certain circumstances. The United Kingdom is not party to that convention and there is no legal basis for the United Kingdom to meet the request of the Government of Ecuador to grant safe passage for Mr Assange out of the United Kingdom.
	The Government of Ecuador have also sought guarantees regarding the possible onward extradition of Mr Assange to a third country, and have pointed to concerns about possible human rights implications if Mr Assange were to be extradited from the United Kingdom. In our discussions with Ecuador, we have been clear that the safeguards in place under the European Convention on Human Rights, international law, European Union law and United Kingdom law fully address the concerns raised by Mr Assange and by the Government of Ecuador.
	The suggestion that there would be a risk of a breach of Mr Assange's human rights on extradition to Sweden is completely unfounded. An argument to this effect was comprehensively rejected by the courts in the United Kingdom. Both the United Kingdom and Sweden are signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights and the British Government have complete confidence in the independence and fairness of the Swedish judicial system. As we have discussed with the Government of Ecuador, the United Kingdom and Sweden robustly implement and adhere to the highest standards of human rights protection.
	The suggestion that Mr Assange's human rights would be put at risk by the possibility of onward extradition from Sweden to a third country is also without foundation. Not only would Sweden-as a signatory to the European Convention on Human Rights-be required to refuse extradition in circumstances which would breach his human rights, but the authorities in Sweden would also be legally obliged to seek the United Kingdom's consent before any extradition to a non-EU member state could proceed. Our consent may only be given in accordance with the international conventions by which the UK is bound, including the European Convention on Human Rights, and also our domestic law. In practice, this means that the United Kingdom could only consent to Mr Assange's onward extradition from Sweden to a third country if satisfied that extradition would be compatible with his human rights, and that there was no prospect of a death sentence being imposed or carried out.
	We have used our discussions with the Government of Ecuador to explain the issues in detail. In the context of widespread speculation that a decision to grant asylum by the Ecuadorean Government was imminent, and as part of these exchanges, on 15 August the British embassy in Quito shared with the Government of Ecuador an informal note, or aide-memoire, to set out key points of our position and ensure that the Ecuadorean authorities had a complete understanding of the full legal context. Ecuador reacted to this communication claiming that a reference to the UK's Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987 constituted a threat to its embassy in London. I have been consistently clear that we are not threatening the embassy of Ecuador and that we are absolutely committed to the principles of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and always act in accordance with it.
	It is a matter of regret that instead of continuing our discussions, the Foreign Minister of Ecuador announced on 16 August that Ecuador had decided to grant diplomatic asylum to Mr Assange. This was confirmed to us in a diplomatic note of 16 August.
	We wish to continue our dialogue with the Government of Ecuador. We believe that our two countries should be able to find a diplomatic solution. We have invited the Government of Ecuador to resume, as early as possible, the discussions we have held on this matter to date. I confirmed that in a meeting with Ecuador's Vice-President Moreno on 29 August in London, during his visit to the Paralympics.
	We continue also to discuss the matter with the Swedish authorities, which retain an interest in the completion of Mr Assange's extradition proceedings.

Nursery Milk Consultation

Earl Howe: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Department of Health (Dr Daniel Poulter) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Government's consultation on the Next Steps for Nursery Milk is currently under way. We have received a large number of responses from a range of organisations including childcare settings, specialist milk suppliers, and milk industry.
	Due to the summer break, we have been asked to provide extra time to schools and nurseries to respond to the consultation. The Government are therefore extending the consultation period for an extra six weeks, to ensure that anyone who wants to contribute can do so. The new closing date of the consultation is Tuesday 23 October 2012.
	The Government are committed to continuing the Nursery Milk Scheme. Through this consultation, we are exploring three different options for improving the operation of the scheme.
	We will publish a formal response to the consultation on the future operation of the Nursery Milk Scheme taking full account of all the consultation responses.
	Next Steps for Nursery Milk has already been placed in the Library.

Pensions: Automatic Enrolment Thresholds

Lord Freud: My honourable friend the Minister for Pensions (Steve Webb MP) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am pleased to announce that later today I will be publishing the Government's consultation on the review and revision of earning thresholds for automatic enrolment 2013/2014.
	This is an annual exercise. The report sets out the context of this review, the evidence base and the proposed rates for 2013/14. We are seeking views both on the factors that should inform next year's thresholds and the proposed rates. We would welcome responses in particular that tell us more about the tax relief method that schemes are currently using.
	The consultation paper will be available later today on the department's website: http://dwp.gov.uk/consultations/2012/ and I will also place a copy in the House Library.

Personal Independence Payment

Lord Freud: Disability living allowance (DLA) is being replaced by a new benefit called personal independence payment (PIP) for people aged 16 to 64 from April 2013.
	On 2 August 2012 we announced details of the organisations that have been successful in the competition to provide the new independent assessment services for PIP.
	This announcement concluded a commercial process that began earlier this year. On 30 April the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) announced the 10 organisations which had been awarded a place on the framework to deliver health and disability assessments. This framework is made up of four regional lots plus a national lot, lot 5.
	On 2 May the DWP invited the organisations in lots 1 to 4 to tender to deliver the PIP assessment service on behalf of the DWP and the Northern Ireland Social Security Agency. The competition selected the following bidders for each of the three regional lots:
	- Lot 1 (Scotland, North East and North West England) -Atos IT Services UK Ltd
	- Lot 2 (Wales and Central England)-Capita Business Services Ltd
	- Lot 3 (London and Southern England)-Atos IT Services UK Ltd
	The recommended supplier for lot 4 is still to be confirmed through the Northern Ireland Social Security Agency approvals process and will be announced in due course.

Police Pension Scheme

Lord Henley: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Theresa May) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	On 27 March 2012, I issued a Written Statement to the House concerning remuneration and conditions of service in the police. Within that Statement I explained that I would put forward a proposal on long-term reform of police pensions to the Police Negotiating Board, which I did on the same day. In common with changes which have been developed across public service pension schemes, my proposal reflected the principles for reform established last year by the report of the Independent Public Service Pensions Commission, led by Lord Hutton.
	My officials have been engaged in detailed and constructive discussions with representatives of the Police Negotiating Board since 27 March, and I have received a number of written representations from the organisations represented. Having considered the outcome of those discussions, and the representations made during this period of consultation, I am announcing today my decision for the reform design framework for police pensions. This framework sets out the Government's final position on the main elements of police pension reform and will form the basis for discussions on points of further detail in moving to implement these changes.
	The main parameters of the new scheme design are set out below:
	a. a pension scheme design based on career average revalued earnings;
	b. a provisional accrual rate of 1/55.3 of pensionable earnings each year, subject to agreement on the outstanding issues;
	c. there will be no cap on how much pension can be accrued;
	d. a revaluation rate of active members' benefits in line with the consumer prices index (CPI) + 1.25%;
	e. pensions in payment and deferred benefits to increase in line with CPI;
	f. average member contributions of 13.7% from April 2015. As announced by the Chief Secretary to the Treasury on 20 December 2011, the Government will review the impact of the 2012-13 contribution changes, including the effect of membership opt-outs, before taking final decisions on how future increases will be delivered in 2013-14 and 2014-15, and in the new scheme. Interested parties will have a full opportunity to provide evidence and their views to the Government as part of the review;
	g. flexible retirement from the scheme's minimum pension age of 55, built around the scheme's normal pension age of 60-for all active members aged 55 or more at retirement, 2015 scheme benefits taken before normal pension age will be actuarially reduced with reference to the 2015 scheme's normal pension age, rather than the deferred pension age (ie state pension age). Those members' benefits will continue to be paid after age 60 at that actuarially reduced level;
	All other members will have their 2015 scheme benefits actuarially reduced on a cost-neutral basis from the scheme's deferred pension age;
	h. the normal pension age of 60 will be subject to regular review, which will also consider the linked early retirement facility described at (g). These reviews will consider the increasing state pension age and any changes to it, alongside evidence from interested parties, including staff associations and employers. It will consider if the normal pension age of 60 remains relevant, taking account of the economical, efficient and effective management of the police service, the changing profile of the workforce and the occupational demands of, and fitness standards for, police officer roles;
	i. this regular review will be informed by scheme data and experience;
	j. late retirement factors for members retiring from active service to be actuarially neutral from normal pension age;
	k. a deferred pension age equal to the individual's state pension age;
	l. optional lump sum by commutation at a rate of £12 for every £1 per annum of pension foregone in accordance with HMRC limits and regulations;
	m. abatement in existing schemes to continue;
	n. ill health retirement benefits to be based on the arrangements in the 2006 scheme;
	o. all other ancillary benefits to be based on those contained in the 2006 scheme;
	p. members rejoining after a period of deferment of less than five years can link new service with previous service, as if they had always been an active member;
	q. members transferring between public service schemes would be treated as having continuous active service;
	r. an employer contribution cap and floor, as described in the reform design framework.
	Transitional and protection arrangements
	There will be full statutory protection for accrued rights for all members as follows:
	a. all benefits accrued under final salary arrangements will be linked to the member's final salary, in accordance with the rules of the member's current schemes, when they leave the reformed scheme;
	b. full recognition of a member's expectation to double accrual for service accrued under the Police Pension Scheme 1987 ("the 1987 scheme"), so that a member's full continuous pensionable service upon retirement will be used to calculate an averaged accrual rate to be applied to service accrued under the 1987 scheme;
	c. members of the 1987 scheme to be able to access their 1987 scheme benefits when they retire at that scheme's ordinary pension age (ie, from 30 years' pensionable service; age 50 with 25 or more years' pensionable service; or the member's voluntary retirement age), subject to abatement rules for that scheme. Pensionable service for the purpose of calculating the ordinary pension age will include any continuous pensionable service accrued under both the 1987 scheme and the 2015 scheme;
	d. members of the Police Pension Scheme 2006 ("the 2006 scheme") to be able to access their benefits under that scheme when they retire at that scheme's normal pension age (ie, age 55);
	e. members will continue to have access to an actuarially assessed commutation factor for benefits accrued under the 1987 scheme.
	There will be statutory transitional protection for certain categories of members, as follows:
	a. all active 2006 scheme members who, as of 1 April 2012, have 10 years or less to their current normal pension age (ie, age 55) will see no change in when they can retire, nor any decrease in the amount of pension they receive at their current normal pension age. This protection will be achieved by the member remaining in their current scheme until they retire;
	b. all active 1987 scheme members who, as of 1 April 2012, have 10 years or less to age 55 or have 10 years or less to age 48 and are 10 years or less from a maximum unreduced pension will see no change in when they can retire, nor any decrease in the amount of pension they receive at their current normal pension age. This protection will be achieved by those members remaining in their current scheme until they retire;
	c. there will be a further period of tapered protection for up to four years for scheme members. Members who are within four years of qualifying for transitional protection, as of 1 April 2012, will have limited protection so that on average for every month closer to qualifying for transitional protection they gain about 53 days of protection. The period of protected service for any member under these tapering arrangements will have finished by 31 March 2022. At the end of the protected period, they will be transferred into the new pension scheme arrangements. Further details on how the tapered protection will apply are set out in the reform design framework.
	Areas for further detailed discussion
	As set out in the reform design framework, there will be further discussion on specific areas of detail, responding in part to issues raised during consultation with the Police Negotiating Board. In particular there will be further consideration of equalities issues that have been identified, or any which may be identified during further discussion, as well as arrangements to ensure compatibility between the new scheme design and recognised existing or future schemes for police officers exiting the service before normal pension age.
	I believe this represents a fair outcome, reflecting the range of issues raised during consultation on my original proposal. This will continue to offer valuable pension arrangements for police officers which will be affordable and sustainable in the future.
	The Government Actuary's Department has confirmed that this design does not exceed the cost ceiling set by the Government in my proposal of 27 March. Copies of the reform design framework and the Government Actuary's Department verification report have been placed in the Library of both Houses.

Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Theresa May MP) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	In accordance with Sections 14(3), 14(4) and 14(5) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005, David Anderson QC prepared a report on the operation of the Act in 2011, which I laid before the House on 26 March 2012.
	I am grateful to David Anderson QC for the final report on that Act, and the control order regime it provided for. Following consultation within my department and with other relevant agencies, I am today laying before the House my response to David Anderson QC's recommendations.
	Copies of the government response will be available in the Vote Office and a copy will also be placed on the Home Office website.
	Now that the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 has been repealed, David Anderson QC has agreed to perform the role of independent reviewer of the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011.
	I am grateful to David Anderson QC for accepting this invitation and for continuing his work as reviewer of the Terrorism Acts 2000 and 2006.

Rail Franchising

Earl Attlee: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Transport (Theresa Villiers) has made the following ministerial Statement.
	On 15 August 2012 the Department for Transport announced to the London Stock Exchange that it intended to award the intercity West Coast franchise to First West Coast Limited, a subsidiary of First Group.
	Bids were received from Abellio InterCity West Coast Limited-NV Nederlandse Spoorwegen, First West Coast Limited-FirstGroup plc, Keolis/SNCF West Coast Limited-Keolis SA and SNCF, Virgin Trains Limited-Virgin Group Holdings Limited.
	The new franchise is planned to begin operation on Sunday 9 December 2012. The franchise will operate for a core term of 13 years and 4 months, with an option to be extended to operate for up to 15 years. The winning bid from First West Coast Limited provides for a premium of £5.5 billion NPV over the core franchise term.
	The West Coast Main Line is one of the most important intercity rail passenger routes in the country and it is also a valuable public asset. Over the last decade and more, taxpayers have invested £9 billion to upgrade the infrastructure. It is a profitable franchise for the current operator and after significant public investment in the line the Government are rightly seeking to get a substantial return for passengers and taxpayers.
	The First West Coast bid provides: more trains on the route, with 12,000 extra seats per day provided by 11 new 6 carriage electric trains from December 2016 (in addition to the 106 extra Pendolino carriages currently being introduced); refurbishing the existing Pendolino and Voyager train fleets, more capacity on services between Birmingham and Scotland, and faster journey times between London Euston and Glasgow; new services to Blackpool, Bolton and Shrewsbury, subject to approval of the ORR; lower Standard Anytime fares over the first two years; £22 million in station improvements; Oyster-style smart ticketing; and, for the first time in an intercity franchise, better customer satisfaction as measured by the National Passenger Survey.
	When a new franchise begins, employees of the current franchise operator, including drivers, guards and back office staff will be transferred to the new operator, protected by TUPE regulations. All of the rolling stock used by the incumbent operator will also transfer across.
	Taken together, I believe that the commitments in First West Coast's bid represent significant improvements for passengers and will provide a good return for the taxpayer.
	As a result of a legal challenge, which the government intends to defend robustly, we have not yet signed the contract with First West Coast, and consequently the competition remains live. I cannot give the full commercial details of the winning bid, or indeed of the other bids. Nor is it usual or appropriate-once litigation proceedings have commenced-for the Government to comment on the detail of that, other than to say that our legal advisers are fully engaged in addressing and responding to those proceedings.
	I will continue to keep the House updated, subject to the constraints of legal or commercial privilege.

Reducing Audit Requirements

Lord Marland: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (Vince Cable) has made the following ministerial Statement:
	In October 2011, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) launched a consultation on giving more small companies and subsidiaries the ability to make a commercial decision about whether or not to have an audit. It also proposed allowing companies more flexibility to change their accounting framework.
	The response to the consultation has helped the department to refine the proposals. In particular the proposals have been amended to make it easier for parent companies that want a subsidiary to be exempt from audit to provide the requisite guarantee of the subsidiaries' liabilities.
	These changes will allow 120,000 additional companies to be exempt from audit and 67,000 dormant companies to be exempt from the need to prepare and file annual accounts. There will also be increased flexibility for companies to change their accounting framework, which will enable them to take advantage of appropriately reduced disclosures.
	We seek to achieve our ambition of making the UK one of the best places in Europe to start, finance and grow a business, in part through reducing the regulatory burden on UK businesses. Thus we welcome the broad support received for the overall principle of reducing audit requirements for unlisted companies and the support for proposals which promote flexibility and prevent UK businesses from being at a disadvantage to their European competitors.
	BIS is today publishing a response to the consultation, which sets out the Government's intention to introduce legislative changes to enable companies to take advantage of these changes. The proposals are deregulatory and reduce costs for business of at least £100 million per year, and possibly much more.
	Legislation is expected to come into force from 1 October 2012, to be available for accounting years beginning on or after that date.
	The consultation response, and the final stage impact assessments are available on the BIS website at www.bis.gov.uk/consultations.

Regional Growth Fund

Lord Marland: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Business and Enterprise (Michael Fallon) has today made the following Statement.
	The regional growth fund (RGF) is helping to rebalance the economy by helping those areas and communities that are currently dependent on the public sector. The fund is unlocking private sector investment in the local economy, creating jobs and making Britain open for business.
	The RGF is good value for money and delivers funding to parts of the country that need it most-approximately £6 of private sector leverage for every £1 of public money.
	The RGF is delivering jobs and having a positive impact on businesses: work to finalise contracts for rounds 1 and 2 is nearly complete and preparations are on track to announce round 3 awards in the autumn.
	Rounds 1 and 2
	Progress is good on rounds 1 and 2 with over half the bidders (127) contracted and able to draw down funding and a further 51 completing their due diligence reports. So far, agreed offers have unlocked almost 198,352 jobs.
	There is now a firm and agreed position with nine in 10 bidders; they are signing up to agreed terms or withdrawing and allowing the reallocation of the fund or, in cases such as Lotus, agreeing a delay.
	The priority now is to agree a way forward with the remaining few, which is being done during the autumn.
	Currently 149 projects and programmes have started, unlocking almost £4.8 billion of private investment into our economy. Several companies were content to start work before receiving any funds; agreeing terms has given them the confidence to get going and start work.
	The number of withdrawn projects and programmes has increased to 24 (10%). For a fund of this size this number is fairly low: withdrawals also point to the robustness of the process-something the NAO has been positive about. See annexe A for the full list.
	The reasons for withdrawals vary from global market conditions; realisation from their own due diligence that the project could not be supported; to changes in senior management requiring a new strategy.
	Long-term impact
	All RGF projects and programmes are being monitored; this will continue for years to come, in order to understand the impact of the RGF and continue to protect taxpayers' interests. Monitoring will include an annual review of progress that will be reported to Parliament at the end of each financial year, beginning in the spring of 2013.
	Round 3
	The round 3 contracting process will be quicker and lessons learned from the previous rounds will be implemented. The contracting process should take no longer than six months to complete from when Ministers allocate support for the bid to the signing of final offer letters.
	Of the 414 bids received in round 3, 132 have been declined, four withdrew and 278 were shortlisted. All bidders were informed of the outcome of the initial appraisal stage on 14 August.
	Assessment of the 278 shortlisted bids continues and is on track for final announcements this autumn. Lord Heseltine's panel will meet this month to agree recommendations, and Ministers will meet in October to make final decisions.
	Annexe A-Withdrawn projects from rounds 1 and 2
	1. Ames Goldsmith UK Ltd
	2. Caparo Precision Strip
	3. CE3-Conitech
	4. Cleveland Potash Ltd
	5. CT5-Exhausto Ltd
	6. CT7-Aggregate Industries Ltd
	7. CT8-WD Irwin & Sons
	8. CT9-Arla
	9. Cumbrian Holdings
	10. Diodes Zetex Semiconductors Ltd
	11. Federal-Mogul Friction Product
	12. Heerema Hartlepool Ltd
	13. Messier-Dowty Ltd
	14. Nissan UK P3
	15. Pilkington United Kingdom Ltd
	16. Rapiscan Systems
	17. Shepherd Offshore Ltd
	18. Sirius Minerals
	19. St Modwen Properties plc
	20. T&N Plastics Ltd
	21. Thales Properties Ltd (Leicester)
	22. Universal Engineering
	23. Vestas Technology UK Ltd
	24. Zegen (Wilton) Ltd

Rwanda

Baroness Northover: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for International Development has made the following statement.
	Following my visit to the Kivus region of the Democratic Republic of Congo in July I delayed the disbursement of general budget support (GBS) to Rwanda because of concerns about the impact of the conflict on civilians in the region and reports of Rwandan involvement in the M23 mutiny. At this time I sought assurances from President Kagame that Rwanda was adhering to the strict partnership principles around GBS which I strengthened in the summer of 2011.
	Rwanda has engaged constructively with the peace process initiated through the International Conference on the Great Lakes Region and there is a continuing ceasefire in the Kivus. Given this progress and recognising that the Government of Rwanda has continued to demonstrate its strong commitment to reducing poverty and improving its financial management, Britain will partially restore its general budget support to Rwanda. We will now disburse half (£8 million) of the delayed GBS tranche and will reprogramme the remaining £8 million. This decision reflects our responsibility to protect the poor, but also caution as concerns remain over Rwanda's involvement with the M23 rebels. The reallocated money will be directly channelled to programmes for education and food security, to ensure that the poorest people in Rwanda are not hurt by this change. It will put over 60,000 more Rwandan children into primary school, half of whom will be girls, and increase production of key food security crops by an estimated 5,130 metric tonnes.
	There are still concerns that Rwanda could do more to meet our joint partnership principles in full. This is the first of two budget support payments scheduled for the financial year 2012-13. The next disbursement is due in December 2012. A decision on that disbursement will be made in due course. The UK will continue to closely monitor the Government of Rwanda's role in bringing about peace in the eastern DRC region.

Special Educational Needs Reform

Lord Hill of Oareford: My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Children and Families (Sarah Teather MP) has made the following ministerial Statement:
	The proposals to reform provision for children and young people with special educational needs were first set out in the special educational needs and disability Green Paper Support and Aspiration, published in March 2011, and the subsequent Next Steps document published in May this year. The reforms are being tested in 20 pathfinder areas, covering 31 local authorities and their health partners.
	We have today published draft provisions to improve the support provided to those children and young people, and to their parents. These provide for:
	new education, health and care plans which will ensure more streamlined and integrated support for children, young people and families than the current statement and learning difficulty assessment;a new duty for joint commissioning which will require local authorities and health bodies to take joint responsibility for providing services;a requirement on local authorities to publish a local offer of services for disabled children and young people and those with special educational needs;new protections for young people aged 16-25 in further education and a stronger focus on preparing them for adulthood;parents and young people, for the first time, to be entitled to have a personal budget, extending their choice and control over their support; andfurther education colleges for the first time and all academies, including free schools, to have the same duties as maintained schools to safeguard the education of children and young people with SEN.
	Previously further education colleges had not been subject to SEN duties. The provisions relating to academies reflect the requirements currently in the majority of funding agreements signed since the introduction of the Academies Act 2010. Placing these requirements on the face of the legislation will give greater clarity to academies, parents and young people and will ensure further education colleges face the same requirements for the first time. The draft provisions would ensure that parents, young people and children are on the same footing whether they attend (or wish to attend) a maintained school, an academy, or a further education or sixth form college.
	The Government look forward to receiving views and feedback on the draft clauses, whilst we continue to learn from our pathfinder programme, before introducing legislation at a later date.
	With the Ministry of Justice, we are also publishing a number of draft clauses relating to family justice and will make a further statement after the close of the current consultation on co-operative parenting.

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Theresa May MP) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Section 19(1) of the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Act 2011 (the Act) requires the Secretary of State to report to Parliament as soon as reasonably practicable after the end of every relevant three-month period on the exercise of her TPIM powers under the Act during that period.
	The level of information provided will always be subject to slight variations based on operational advice.
	
		
			 TPIM notices in force (as of 31 August 2012) 9 
			 TPIM notices in respect of British citizens (as of 31 August 2012) 9 
			 Variations made to measures specified in TPIM notices 27 
			 Applications to vary measures specified in TPIM notices refused 12 
		
	
	During the reporting period: no TPIM notices were imposed; no TPIM notices were extended; no TPIM notices were revoked; and no TPIM notices were revived. A TPIM Review Group (TRG) keeps every TPIM notice under regular and formal review. The TPIM Review Group met twice during this reporting period.
	One individual was charged in relation to an offence under Section 23 of the Act (contravening a measure specified in a TPIM notice without reasonable excuse) during the period.
	Section 16 of the 2011 Act provides rights of appeal against decisions by the Secretary of State in relation to decisions taken under the Act. No appeals were lodged under Section 16 during the reporting period.
	EWHC 1718 (admin), handed down on 25 June 2012, the High Court upheld the TPIM notice imposed on BF. On 6 July 2012, in Secretary of State for the Home Department v AM [2012] EWHC 1854 (admin), the High Court upheld the TPIM notice imposed on AM and the renewal of the control order which preceded it, with a minor amendment to one measure. AM has applied to the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal this judgment. On 19 July 2012, in Secretary of State for the Home Department v AY [2012] EWHC 2054 (admin), the High Court upheld the TPIM notice and dismissed the appeal against the renewal of the control order which preceded it. Most full judgments are available at http://www.bailii.org/.

Damages Act 1996: Discount Rate

Lord McNally: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Jonathan Djanogly), has made the following ministerial Statement:
	On 1 August 2012 the Ministry of Justice, the Scottish Government and the Department of Justice, Northern Ireland, jointly published a consultation paper, Damages Act 1996: The Discount Rate-How Should it be Set? (CP12/2012).
	The paper seeks views on how the Lord Chancellor in relation to England and Wales, Scottish Ministers in relation to Scotland and the Department of Justice in Northern Ireland in relation to Northern Ireland should set the rate of return to be prescribed under Section 1 of the Damages Act 1996.
	The prescribed rate is taken into account by the court in determining the return to be expected from the investment of a sum awarded as damages for future pecuniary loss in actions for personal injury. This rate of return is referred to as "the discount rate" and is currently 2.5%.
	The consultation period is 12 weeks from and including 1 August. Copies of the consultation paper have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses. The document is also available online at www.justice.gov.uk/consultations.
	Independently of this consultation and the review of the amount of the prescribed discount rate of which it forms part, the Ministry of Justice intends to issue a consultation paper in the autumn of 2012 to review the present legal basis for the setting of the rate in England and Wales. The consultation will seek views on whether the restrictions on the factors that can be taken into account in prescribing a rate under Section 1 of the Damages Act 1996 are still appropriate.

Armed Forces: Chief Coroner

Lord McNally: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Helen Grant) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	My right honourable friend the Minister for the Armed Forces and I wish to make the following Statement to the House regarding investigations into service personnel who have died overseas.
	On 24 September 2012 the Government will commence powers under Sections 12 and 50 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 to enable for the first time deaths of service personnel killed abroad to be investigated in Scotland under the Fatal Accidents and Sudden Deaths Inquiry (Scotland) Act 1976 where appropriate
	His Honour Judge Peter Thornton QC, who has today assumed the role of Chief Coroner of England and Wales will be able to recommend that investigations be transferred from England and Wales in appropriate circumstances, for example where the deceased's family is based in Scotland.
	The provisions aim to reduce the additional distress that can be caused by ensuring that bereaved service families from Scotland do not have to travel long distances to England or Wales to attend an inquest.

Armed Forces: Invincible Class Carriers

Lord Astor of Hever: My honourable friend the Minister for Defence Equipment, Support and Technology (Philip Dunne) made the following Written Ministerial Statement on 10 September:
	I can today announce our plans to preserve the legacy of the Royal Navy's Invincible Class aircraft carriers.
	The three Invincible Class aircraft carriers-HMS "Invincible" (in service July 1980), HMS "Ark Royal" (in service November 1985) and HMS "Illustrious" (in service June 1982)-served this country with great distinction having played key roles in conflicts in the Falkland Islands, Iraq and Bosnia. The last of these, HMS "Illustrious", is due to retire from the Royal Navy in 2014.
	After that date and in recognition of the service given by these ships in protecting the UK over the last 30 years, it is our preference to see HMS Illustrious preserved intact as a lasting tribute to the Service personnel who served on all three of the carriers.
	In early 2014 we intend to hold an Industry Day to launch a competition for the innovative re-use of the ship to which interested parties will be encouraged to attend. We will invite a range of organisations, including private sector companies, charities and trusts to put forward viable proposals to ensure that HMS Illustrious remains intact and available for future private use while still offering taxpayers value for money.

Armed Forces: Reserve Forces

Lord Astor of Hever: My right honourable friend the Minister for the Armed Forces (Andrew Robathan) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement:
	On 16 February 2012, an order was made under Section 56(1A) of the Reserve Forces Act 1996 to enable 2,100 reservists to be brought into permanent service as part of defence's contribution to the safety and security of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games.
	On 7 August 2012, authority was granted to raise the number of reservists to 2,300. In total 2,258 reservists were brought into permanent service. Some provided specialist capabilities and expertise to defence's support to the police and other civil and Olympic authorities, while the majority formed part of the support to Olympic venue security operations; a substantive contribution to what has widely been acknowledged as a successful and positive opportunity to interact with the British public and advertise the nation's strengths to overseas observers. The order ceases to have effect on 20 September 2012.

Assets of Community Value Regulations 2012

Baroness Hanham: I wish to clarify an answer I gave on 23 July when Grand Committee was considering the Assets of Community Value Regulations.
	The Assets of Community Value Regulations which will introduce the Community Right to Bid create rights for two different categories of local groups. First, local voluntary or community bodies (which are broadly defined) will be able to nominate assets to be listed. However, only those local groups which meet the strict requirements to be a community interest group will have the right to trigger the full moratorium period of six months after the owner has notified an intention to make a relevant disposal. Community interest groups also count as voluntary or community bodies, so can nominate land for listing.
	The noble Baroness, Lady Thornton, asked whether unincorporated community groups can bid for assets. In reply I said that the only people who can make a bid or take the process forward are the community interest groups, because they are properly formed and incorporated. While it is true that these groups may make a bid, this answer inadvertently gave a too limited impression of the benefit of the policy, because in fact any person or group is entitled to make a bid to purchase a building or land which is listed as asset of community value. However, only a community interest group may trigger the full six-month moratorium period.
	The Community Right to Bid in England brings together provisions in Chapter 3 Part 5 of the Localism Act 2011 and the Assets of Community Value (England) Regulations 2012. In light of the fact that this is a new scheme it is important that there is clarity on what rights and responsibilities this scheme confers on owners of listed assets, local authorities and the voluntary and community sector.

Audit Exemptions

Lord Marland: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (Dr Vince Cable) has today made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	On Thursday 6 September 2012 I laid a Written Statement before the House about the publication that day of the Government's response to the October 2011 consultation on Audit Exemptions and Change of Accounting Framework.
	That Statement included an explanation that the legislative changes to enable companies to take advantage of the new and increased audit exemptions would come into force from 1 October 2012, to be available for accounting years beginning on or after that date.
	Regulations have now been made introducing those legislative changes. However, in fact the exemptions will be available for accounting years ending on or after 1 October 2012. The regulations are the Companies and Limited Liability Partnerships (Accounts and Audit Exemptions and Change of Accounting Framework) Regulations 2012 (SI 2012 No. 2301).

Boundary Commission for Wales

Lord McNally: My right honourable friend the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I should like to inform the House that I have made the following appointment under Schedule 1 to the Parliamentary Constituencies Act 1986.
	The Honourable Mr Justice Wyn Williams is appointed as Deputy Chairman of the Boundary Commission for Wales effective until 30 September 2015.

Cold Weather Payment Scheme 2012-13

Lord Freud: My honourable friend the Minister for Pensions (Steve Webb) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am pleased to announce that later today we intend to lay regulations to amend the Cold Weather Payment scheme. The changes detailed in these regulations will come into force on 1 November this year, in time for the beginning of the winter period.
	Following advice from the Meteorological Office the amendments will introduce one new weather station, Rostherne, to the scheme for winter 2012-13 and withdraw the current station at Woodford. As a result of the changes the postcodes that are currently linked to the withdrawn station will be re-assigned to different weather stations.
	The new station has been chosen to maintain weather station to postcode links that are at least as representative as the current arrangement.
	I am writing to each Member who made representations about the administration of the scheme last winter to make them aware of the advice from the Meteorological Office.
	Cold Weather Payments are separate from, and in addition to, Winter Fuel Payments.
	The amendments resulted from the department's annual review of the Cold Weather Payments scheme. The review drew on expert advice from the Meteorological Office and took account of representations from benefit claimants and Members of Parliament.
	For winter 2012-13 the Cold Weather Payment rate will continue to be £25 for each seven-day period of very cold weather.

Crime: Surveillance Cameras

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Crime Prevention (Jeremy Browne) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today announcing arrangements for the implementation of provisions within the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 for the regulation of surveillance camera systems.
	The Government support the use of surveillance cameras in tackling crime. They are committed to ensuring that any deployment in public places of surveillance cameras, including CCTV and ANPR, is appropriate, proportionate, transparent and effective in meeting its stated purpose. This is why the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 now requires government to put in place a regulatory framework for surveillance camera systems comprising a code of practice and a surveillance camera commissioner.
	The code of practice will contain guidance for system operators. Relevant authorities specified in Section 33(5) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 have a duty to have regard to the code, and other system operators will be encouraged to adopt it on a voluntary basis. Preparatory work on the code of practice is underway, ensuring it is positioned appropriately alongside existing regulatory arrangements under the Data Protection Act 1990 and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. We anticipate a period of statutory consultation over the draft code of practice in the autumn of 2012 in advance of laying the draft before Parliament for approval. Subject to parliamentary approval, we aim to bring the code of practice into force from April 2013.
	A key element of the effectiveness of surveillance camera systems is their ability to provide images and associated information of an evidential standard which supports both the investigation of crime and bringing perpetrators to justice. We are therefore continuing the arrangements that have seen the role of Interim CCTV Regulator combined with that of the Forensic Science Regulator, and are appointing Mr Andrew Rennison who currently holds both these appointments as Surveillance Camera Commissioner with immediate effect. This will enable him to build the necessary capacity to fulfil his statutory functions in full when the code of practice comes into force.
	The term of appointment has been synchronised with that of the Forensic Science Regulator and will run until 10 February 2014. An open competition will be held in due course to fill both posts from that date.
	The functions of the commissioner are set out in Section 34(2) of the Protection of Freedoms Act. In advance of the code of practice being brought into force the commissioner has been tasked with: delivering a three year business plan setting out how these functions will be fulfilled; reaching an agreement over the operation of gateways with both the Information Commissioner and the Chief Surveillance Commissioner who also have regulatory responsibilities relating to surveillance cameras, and then making that agreement publicly available; and, establishing an advisory council with a suitable range of skills and experience to support him in his work.
	The Home Office is making a small team of civil servants available to support the commissioner in carrying out his functions, along with accommodation within its offices at 2 Marsham Street, London, SW1P 4DF.
	The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 provides for an incremental approach to regulation which will secure continued public confidence in the use of surveillance cameras in what is a complex area of practice. It gives the commissioner no powers of enforcement or inspection, nor any powers for the investigation of complaints. The commissioner is, however, charged with reviewing the operation of the code of practice and providing advice, including advice to government on its effectiveness and on any changes which may be necessary. The commissioner is, therefore, empowered to make independent and transparent recommendations to government on the development of the regulatory framework.
	The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 also requires in Section 35 that the commissioner publishes a report about the exercise of his functions on an annual basis and presents a copy to the Home Secretary, which must then be laid before Parliament.
	Through these arrangements, we intend to ensure that surveillance camera systems continue to be an important tool available to communities to help tackle crime and prevent terrorism while balancing public safety objectives with the individual's right to privacy.

Disability: Fulfilling Potential

Lord Freud: My honourable friend the Minister for Disabled People (Ms Esther McVey) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am pleased to announce that later today we will publish two documents as part of our disability strategy, Fulfilling Potential. These set out how the Government will work in partnership with others to enable disabled people to achieve their aspirations and play a full role in society.
	The London 2012 Paralympic Games have challenged outdated perceptions of disabled people. They have provided a platform for greater understanding and inclusion, and a stronger focus on ability rather than disability. Fulfilling Potential will build on this and is about making the UN Convention on the Rights of Disabled People a living reality for disabled people in Britain today.
	Last December we invited disabled people to help shape a new cross-government disability strategy. We received an overwhelming response.
	Fulfilling Potential: The Discussions So Far summarises the issues raised, and shows how actions are already being taken across Government to address many of the issues.
	We will also publish Fulfilling Potential: Next Steps, which will take us further forward. It sets out our vision and principles; outlines further public sector reforms; and announces a new disability action alliance, involving organisations from across the private, public and voluntary and community sectors.
	Convened by Disability Rights UK and supported by the Office for Disability Issues, the alliance will put disabled people and their organisations in influential roles. It will lead the way in promoting local communities which include disabled people, and identify action to change attitudes and behaviours, increase choice and control and encourage early interventions to support independent living.
	We will continue to work with disabled people and publish in the autumn, an analysis of the latest statistics and research, to help build a deeper understanding of disability in our society today; and in 2013 a further strategic document and action plan.
	I will place a copy of both documents in the House Library later today.

Employment Law

Lord Marland: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, (Dr Vince Cable) has today made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The coalition Government made a commitment to review employment legislation to ensure it provides the flexibility for employers without compromising fairness for employees. We have reported to Parliament at various points during the course of the Employment Law Review and the Employment-related law Red Tape Challenge, the steps we are taking to reform UK employment legislation.
	The Government have already taken significant steps in reforming employment law including extending the period for eligibility for unfair dismissal from one to two years, streamlining Employment Tribunals, creating a universally portable Criminal Records Bureau check and removing the default retirement age.
	We are today taking a number of further steps which will lead to further changes and reforms that will help reduce burdens on, and increase certainty for, businesses, especially small businesses. We are seeking to address both the perception and the realities of the burden of employment legislation through the Employment Law Review, and are implementing a strong package of reforms. The set of measures which we are announcing today respond to business concerns that we need to do more to help them tackle issues at the end of the employment life cycle. Building on work that has already been implemented, such as the doubling of the qualifying period for unfair dismissal from one year to two years, we are now seeking to put in place a range of further measures to help businesses to effectively deal with dismissal, which will:
	create certainty about employers' liabilities;
	provide clarity on dismissal and tribunal processes; and
	give business confidence to use settlement agreements to end employment relationships where this is necessary thereby avoiding the tribunal process completely.
	These measures will reduce risks to employers, increase their flexibility to deal with workplace issues and decrease the costs of resolving disputes. Business will have the support to resolve workplace disputes earlier and, if they proceed to employment tribunal, they will experience a quicker, more efficient process.
	Publishing a Consultation (Ending the Employment Relationship) to support the use of Settlement Agreements and reduce the Unfair Dismissal compensation cap:
	We are already taking a power in the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (ERR) Bill to facilitate the greater use of Settlement Agreements, and to amend the cap on Unfair Dismissal awards. This consultation will seek views on the principles underpinning the use of Settlement Agreements, guidance on their use and model documents for use by employers.
	The consultation will also propose reducing the Unfair Dismissal compensation cap, including the option of a cap of 12 months' pay alongside an upper limit. This maximum level rose significantly under the previous administration. Our proposed changes will give business certainty about the maximum possible liability in respect of an individual unfair dismissal claim (e.g. someone who is paid £20,000 cannot be awarded more than £20,000).
	Statements received between Monday 3 Septemberand Monday 10 September 2012Publishing the Government Response to the call for evidence on dismissal and the idea of compensated no fault dismissal
	Following analysis of the submissions and of international dismissal regulations, we have decided that we will not be pursuing the idea of compensated no fault dismissal.
	There were more than 250 responses to the Call for Evidence. The majority of respondents did not support no-fault dismissal and fewer than 40% of employers thought that it would be beneficial to business. Concerns were raised about the potential negative consequences of the proposal, including the potential for it to damage employee morale (which in turn could decrease productivity) and the risk that micro businesses would find it more difficult to recruit. Furthermore, no fault dismissal would not protect an employer from discrimination claims and so would not secure peace of mind.
	In contrast, respondents were almost universally positive towards settlement agreements, as this tool settles all claims giving employers confidence to resolve problems quickly.
	The issue of no-fault dismissal has been subject to much debate in the press over recent months. Officials have examined the responses carefully, alongside assessing international comparisons, and summarised the feedback and our analysis in the government response. The Government have considered, or is already taking forward, the majority of proposals from Adrian Beecroft's report on employment law, published earlier this year.
	The call for evidence also considered the ACAS Code of Practice on Discipline and Grievance. A number of issues were raised and we will work with ACAS to ensure these are addressed. In particular, there is a need to make the Code more accessible to small business and clarify how their size and resources should be taken into account. This includes making it clear that small businesses can move straight to a final warning if an issue is having a serious impact on their business. The Government are amending the Business Link guidance to more accurately reflect the contents of the ACAS Code and Guidance. The revised guidance will be published shortly.
	Publishing a consultation on the recommendations following the Fundamental Review of Employment Tribunal Rules by Mr Justice Underhill:
	Mr Justice Underhill has made a number of recommendations to simplify and streamline the employment tribunals system. We are today launching a ten-week consultation. That would allow us to implement changes to the rules through secondary legislation next year.
	In addition to the consultation will be introducing amendments to the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill to implement three of the additional recommended changes to primary legislation identified by Mr Justice Underhill.
	Publishing the Government's response to the call for evidence on TUPE, and commitment to consult on potential changes:
	The call for evidence closed earlier this year, and we have completed our analysis of the responses. These broadly reflect a number of common concerns from business and business organisations, for example that:
	employee liability information should be provided by the transferring organisation earlier than 14 days before transfer;
	there is no provision for the post-transfer harmonisation of terms and conditions of employment with existing employees;
	the regulations gold plate the Acquired Rights Directive by including service provision changes in the scope; and
	pensions are a concern in transfer situations for various reasons. (Pensions legislation is being reviewed separately under the Red Tape Challenge.)
	We will be publishing the government response to the call for evidence and signalling our intention to consult on potential changes. We will be developing proposals for a consultation later in the autumn.
	Also in line with the introduction of employment tribunal fees next year, the Government will extend the current HM Courts and Tribunals Service system to protect access to justice for those who cannot afford to pay the fee. Given the concerns raised by business respondents to the employment tribunal fees consultation, such as whether to take into account access to savings and capital, the Government will undertake a review of remissions as part of a wider review required for the introduction of Universal Credit. The review will aim to produce a single remissions system for courts and tribunals which is simpler to use, more cost efficient and better targeted those who can afford to pay fees do so, while continuing to provide access to the courts and tribunal system to those who cannot.

Estate Agency

Lord Marland: My honourable friend the Minister for Employment Relations and Consumers Affairs (Jo Swinson) has today made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today publishing the Government's response to consultations on amending the Estate Agents Act 1979 (EAA) and repealing the Property Misdescriptions Act 1991 (PMA). A limited deregulation of the EAA to take private sale intermediaries out of scope of the Act will provide clarity which the Government expect will also promote competition and potentially innovation, while retaining adequate consumer protection. Repeal of the PMA will remove duplication with the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs).
	Amending the Estate Agents Act 1979
	The amendment to the EAA arose from the Disruptive Business Models theme of the Red Tape Challenge process. It will end the perceived uncertainty, confirmed by the range of views in the consultation about the scope of the legislation, about whether the activities of intermediary businesses such as private sales portals fall within the strict legal definition of "estate agency work" in the EAA. Such portals provide a platform for private sellers to display property details, some provide information about the buying and selling process and some provide tools to allow the buyer to communicate with the seller.
	The Government's view is that some private sale portals may currently be in scope of the EAA, if they act on instructions of the prospective seller or buyer and provide a means for the prospective seller and buyer to make initial contact or to continue to communicate with one another. This is because although publishing advertisements and disseminating information is exempted from the scope of the EAA, facilitating such communication goes beyond this even though it may not amount to any of the services traditionally associated with estate agents.
	Taking the consultation responses into account, the Government believe that a limited deregulation of the EAA would bring benefits to consumers and to the industry without reducing consumer protection. It should provide confidence to existing private sales intermediary businesses and potential new entrants, thereby stimulating competition and innovation leading to more consumer choice and better standards of service. The Government recognise that property sales are significant and occasional transactions for consumers with a risk of consumer detriment if businesses which influence or are directly involved transactions are not regulated. The Government believe that a limited amendment to legislation, combined with guidance, will provide clarity and draws the appropriate balance between the interests of businesses and consumers.
	The Government have therefore decided to amend the EAA to take out of scope intermediaries such as private sale portals which merely enable private sellers to advertise their properties and provide a means for sellers and buyers to contact and communicate with one another. The Government recognise this is a limited amendment-many respondents have commented that the choice for consumers to sell property privately already exists-but the Government are concerned by the uncertainty and range of views as to the legal position of private sales portals that the responses demonstrated.
	This amendment will enable the intermediary to provide a means for the seller and prospective buyer to contact one another, for example online, a branded For Sale board to the seller to assist this process, and to pass on to a buyer solely the information provided by the seller in their advertisement, by whatever channel of communication. If, however, the intermediary offers any personal advice to a seller or a buyer or other ancillary services such as preparing property particulars or photographs or an Energy Performance Certificate, then the intermediary will be in scope of the EAA and bound by its obligations.
	Businesses outside the scope of the EAA will also be out of scope of the PMA (although see below). The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs) applies to all businesses that deal with consumers. They could therefore be relevant where a private individual uses a private sales portal to advertise a property. The degree of due diligence that the CPRs require from such businesses is proportionate to the level of service offered.
	The definition of "estate agency work" is also incorporated in other legislation. The Money Laundering Regulations 2007 require estate agents to guard against and report any suspicion of money laundering. The Terrorism Act 2000 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 incorporate the definition from the EAA in applying particular standards to 'regulated sectors' which include estate agents. The limited amendment will also apply to these pieces of legislation.
	The Government believe this limited amendment will strike the right balance between deregulating low risk services which do not actively involve the business in the property transaction and retaining the consumer protections of the EAA where agents act on behalf of a party to the transaction.
	The next step will be for the proposed amendment to be subjected to parliamentary scrutiny and the Government intend to bring forward the amendment as soon as the parliamentary timetable allows.
	Repealing the Property Misdescriptions Act 1991
	The PMA makes it an offence to make false or misleading statements in the course of an estate agency or property development business about property offered for sale. The CPRs which came into force in 2008 implemented the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive in the UK. These regulations provide similar protections for consumers in a wider range of sectors and their introduction meant that consumers were protected by two broadly equivalent pieces of legislation.
	The Government's consultation elicited responses both for and against repeal. The Government understand the reasons why opponents to repeal of the PMA favour it over the CPRs. The PMA deals specifically with property and as such is easy to apply. The CPRs by contrast are not specific to the sector and, being principles-based, require traders to consider how they apply to their particular circumstances.
	The Government remain of the view, however, that the CPRs provide broadly similar protection to the PMA. The queries and concerns raised are similar to those that were raised when the CPRs were first proposed and these fears do not seem to have materialised in other sectors. The Government believe this situation will continue so long as the PMA remains in place and that repealing the PMA would not significantly reduce levels of consumer protection. This is disputed by some stakeholders but not others and the Government do not find the arguments for a loss of consumer protection convincing.
	The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills will therefore lay an order under the European Communities Act 1972 to repeal the PMA. The current intention is that this will come into force not before October 2013.
	Revised guidance for businesses and consumers will be produced to cover these changes.

Fuel

Earl Attlee: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Today I am publishing our response to the comments received in the consultation on our proposals to implement Articles 7a to 7e of the EU Fuel Quality Directive (Directive 98/70/EC as amended by Directive 2009/30/EC). The directive requires suppliers to reduce the lifecycle greenhouse gas intensity of many transport fuels.
	The response sets out our decision to introduce new secondary legislation to transpose requirements of the Fuel Quality Directive, including new annual reporting requirements for fossil fuels and biofuels.
	The document also details our commitment to amend the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligations Order 2007 ("RTFO Order 2007") to include fuels used in non-road mobile machinery, a policy already announced to the House on July 16 when the department published a related consultation response (Official Report, 16.7.12, col. WS 112).
	An amendment made in December 2011 to the RTFO Order 2007 means that only biofuels meeting minimum sustainability criteria count towards renewable energy targets. Sustainable biofuels play an important role in our efforts to tackle climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector. However, concerns remain about the sustainability of some biofuels, especially around the issue of indirect land use change ("ILUC") and we are pressing the European Commission and other member states to produce a robust method to address this issue. Pending that clarity we are taking a cautious approach to implementing the Fuel Quality Directive.
	The Fuel Quality Directive introduces the requirement for many transport fuel suppliers to reduce the greenhouse gas intensity of the fuels they supply by 6% in 2020. We will not impose on suppliers a greenhouse gas reduction obligation at this point. Instead, we will place an ongoing legal duty on the Secretary of State to propose any further measures necessary to ensure delivery of the requirements of the Fuel Quality Directive. We will rely on the amended RTFO Order 2007 to deliver the greenhouse gas savings necessary under the Fuel Quality Directive for the period up to 2014. We will also put in place a requirement for fuel suppliers to report on the greenhouse gas intensity of both the biofuel and fossil fuels they supply for use in land-based transport and for the associated uses listed in the directive.
	This approach allows us to transpose the Fuel Quality Directive at the minimum cost to UK business.
	I would like to thank all those who took the time to respond to the consultation.

Health: Alcohol Strategy

Earl Howe: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Anna Soubry) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	We are today laying before Parliament the Government Response to the House of Commons Health Committee Report of Session 2010-12: Government's Alcohol Strategy (Cm 8439).
	The committee gave a positive welcome overall to the Government's alcohol strategy and welcomed in particular the decision to introduce a minimum unit price for alcohol. The committee made some important points about the need to set out the evidence behind this policy and its implementation. We will address these points when we consult on the level of minimum unit price and other proposals set out in the strategy during the autumn.
	We welcome the committee's argument that the alcohol industry's participation in the Responsibility Deal is "intrinsic to responsible corporate citizenship". We fully agree with the committee that it is not a substitute for government policy.
	We are committed to reversing the long term rise in both health and social harms from alcohol misuse and have set out in the strategy a number of challenging ambitions by which our success will be judged.
	We welcome the committee's support for effective local action, such as that in Birmingham, and the opportunity they recognize for local authorities and others, supported by Public Health England, to address the serious problems caused by alcohol misuse in local communities.
	Today's publication is in the Library. Copies are available from the Vote Office to honourable Members and to noble Lords from the Printed Paper Office.

Judiciary: Judicial Diversity Taskforce

Lord McNally: My right honourable friend the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Chris Grayling) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Judicial Diversity Taskforce has today published its second report, which outlines the progress achieved over the last year in driving forward change in this area.
	In 2010, the Advisory Panel on Judicial Diversity made a number of recommendations aimed at increasing the diversity of the judiciary and legal professions, in response to concerns that the judiciary did not reflect the make-up of society. The Judicial Diversity Taskforce, comprising the Ministry of Justice, senior members of the judiciary, the Judicial Appointments Commission, the Bar Council, the Law Society and Chartered Institute of Legal Executives, was set up to take those recommendations forward.
	Significant progress has been made by members of the taskforce, having already completed 20 of the 53 recommendations. The taskforce's recent achievements include:
	sharing diversity data and using it to develop a baseline against which to measure progress in increasing diversity;
	opportunities for judicial office being more widely promoted to eligible members of the legal profession, and applicants being offered more robust support throughout the process;
	innovative outreach activities being held to help dispel the myths surrounding the appointments process; and
	proposals being included in the Crime and Courts Bill to introduce flexible working patterns into the senior courts, and enabling the JAC to appoint a candidate from an under-represented group when two candidates are equal on merit.
	Even though we are making good progress, all members of the taskforce recognise that there is still a lot of work to be done and we must not lose this momentum. We will continue to work together to implement the remainder of the recommendations and provide strong leadership so that we start to see real change in this area.
	Copies of the progress report have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
	The document is also available online, at http://www. justice.gov.uk/publications/policy/moj/improving-judicial-diversity-judicial-diversity-taskforce-annual-report.

Local Enterprise Partnerships

Lord Marland: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Business and Enterprise (Michael Fallon) has today made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	BIS Minister of State for Business and Enterprise (Michael Fallon) and the DCLG Minister of State for Housing (Mark Prisk) are today announcing that £25 million of government funding will be made available to support local enterprise partnerships in their pursuit of economic growth.
	Government's goal is to promote strong, sustainable and balanced growth across the UK. Local enterprise partnerships are central to our approach to driving local economic growth and for ensuring that every locality is able to fulfil its potential. Local enterprise partnerships are voluntary partnerships of business and civic leaders, working across local economic areas, and have a vitally important role in identifying opportunities for private sector growth and addressing local barriers to growth through the united efforts of their partners.
	Local enterprise partnerships have also been encouraged to identify local barriers to growth where government action can address some of the specific barriers. Ministers across government are committed to supporting local enterprise partnerships achieve their local growth priorities and tackle the barriers to progress.
	In response to recent strong representations, BIS and DCLG have decided to offer jointly up to £250,000 per annum of matched core funding to local enterprise partnerships for the remainder of this Parliament (until 2014-15), subject to satisfactory proposals being received. We will offer each local enterprise partnership a one-off initial payment of £125,000 for the remainder of this financial year to provide immediate support, with subsequent years' funding dependent on matched funding from local partners. Where matched by funds locally the overall funding pot could equate up to £45 million over this period. With this offer of core resources, local enterprise partnerships will be asked to ensure that they have a clear set of priorities for local growth in place.
	Local enterprise partnerships will remain voluntary business and civic partnerships to drive sustainable private sector growth and job creation in their area. This offer of core resource funding will provide more capacity for local enterprise partnerships to drive forward their growth priorities, allow them to do longer-term resource planning and strengthen support and autonomy of the business-led boards.

Transport: Bus Subsidy

Earl Attlee: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	In March, the Government published Green Light for Better Buses, in which we set out our plans for improving local bus subsidy arrangements and regulations in England outside London. We undertook to consult on these proposals and I can inform the House that the consultation has been launched today and will last for eight weeks. Copies of the consultation document are available in the House Library.

Transport: Railway Stations

Earl Attlee: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I would like to inform the House of the decision that has been made in relation to London Midland's application to change Schedule 17 of the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement (TSA), which was referred to the Department for Transport for arbitration.
	The TSA sets out the various arrangements between train operators relating to the carriage of passengers and the retailing of tickets. London Midland's proposal was to change the minimum opening hours of a number of ticket offices, including the closure of nine offices altogether. These changes would not affect the level of train services in any way.
	I have decided to approve London Midland's proposal in part, but reject some elements where the case for changes has not been made. Ticket offices at Small Heath, Jewellery Quarter, Bescot Stadium, Duddeston and Adderley Park, which were proposed for closure, will remain open. However, I have agreed four of the nine proposed ticket office closures, at Wythall, Witton, Lye and Cheddington.
	Several ticket offices will have their opening hours extended, while a number of other stations will have their ticket office opening hours reduced. A full list of the changes has been published on the department's website.
	In arbitrating this decision, we were careful to ensure that the proposal was in line with the criteria set out in the TSA, whereby passengers continue to enjoy widespread and easy access to the purchase of rail products, and that the proposal represents an improvement in terms of quality of service and/or cost-effectiveness.
	I have also ensured that no particular group of rail users is affected disproportionately by the changes, particularly passengers with disabilities.
	The changes reflect the change in the way passengers are buying tickets, with more choosing to purchase their tickets online or at ticket vending machines, and the changes that have been approved will not generally affect stations during periods in which the ticket office is currently selling more than 12 tickets an hour.
	As a condition of the changes, London Midland will also be required to provide a total of 29 additional ticket vending machines at stations that do not currently have this facility. This will be an improvement in availability at stations where the ticket office is currently only open part-time, with passengers in future able to purchase tickets whenever they wish to travel.
	We have also ensured that London Midland will keep lifts in operation when stations are unstaffed. LM will also improve safety and security at stations, including through the provision of upgraded CCTV at 11 stations and will provide additional shelters and upgraded signage as a condition of this approval.
	In addition, London Midland will invest in 30 new train boarding ramps to improve access to trains for wheelchair users. Passengers who require assistance in making their journey can now book this via the new industry website, which was launched by the Association of Train Operating Companies on 24 August.
	There are currently many ticket offices open for very long hours, while selling very few tickets indeed. In an era where passengers are telling us that they need fares to come down and investment in services to rise, these sorts of costs simply cannot be justified.
	These changes will provide savings to taxpayers and passengers far beyond the life of the existing franchise, and will ultimately save millions of pounds. I believe that this is a necessary step in improving the efficiency of the rail network, and reducing the cost of rail travel for everyone.

Terrorism Act 2000: Schedule 7

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: My right honourable friend the Home Secretary (Theresa May) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today launching a public consultation inviting views on potential changes to the counter-terrorism border security powers contained in Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000.
	Individuals who engage in terror-related activity travel across borders to plan, finance, train for and commit attacks. Examining people at ports and airports is necessary to protect public safety and an essential part of our border security arrangements. However, the operation of these powers must not erode the freedoms which terrorists seek to undermine.
	We would welcome a wide response to the consultation to support us in ensuring the changes address these principles, particularly from those who may be affected by the use of these important powers. A copy of the consultation document has been placed in the House Library and is available on the Home Office website at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/about-us/consultations/schedule-7-review.

Work Capability Assessment: Cancer Treatment

Lord Freud: My honourable friend the Minister for Employment (Mark Hoban MP) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Today I will be publishing the government response to the consultation-Work Capability Assessment: Accounting for the Effects of Cancer Treatment.
	I strongly support the principle of the Work Capability Assessment and am committed to continuously improving the assessment process to ensure it is as fair and as accurate as possible.
	We have a statutory commitment to an annual independent review of the Work Capability Assessment for the first five years of its operation and appointed Professor Malcolm Harrington in June 2010 to start these reviews.
	Professor Harrington has to date carried out two independent reviews of the Work Capability Assessment and is currently undertaking a third. As part of his second independent review Professor Harrington asked Macmillan Cancer Support to look in detail at how the Work Capability Assessment assesses people with cancer in order to provide him with evidence for further recommendations for improvement.
	As a result of the evidence received from Macmillan we decided to conduct an informal consultation to seek a wider range of views and evidence. The consultation, Work Capability Assessment: Accounting for the Effects of CancerTreatment, was announced on 24 November 2011 as part of the Government's Response to Professor Harrington's second review.
	Today's document outlines the responses received to that consultation and provides further information on how we intend to change the way the Work Capability Assessment works for people receiving cancer treatment based on consideration of those responses.
	The revised proposals expand the categories of cancer treatments under which a claimant may be treated as having limited capability to undertake work-related activity to now include individuals who are: awaiting, receiving or recovering from treatment by way of chemotherapy irrespective of route; or awaiting, receiving or recovering from radiotherapy.
	I will place a copy of the full government response to the consultation in the House Library and it will also be available later today at www.dwp.gov.uk/consultations.

Afghanistan

Baroness Warsi: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr William Hague) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I wish to inform the House that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, together with the Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development, is today publishing the 20th progress report on developments in Afghanistan since November 2010.
	On 8 July at the Tokyo Conference the international community, including the UK, agreed to help the Government of Afghanistan meet their country's development needs for the years up to and after security transition in 2014. Specific pledges were made to 2017, with strong commitments from the international community to provide financial assistance to Afghanistan through the "Transformation Decade" to the end of 2024. This support is vital to ensure that the Government can provide continued stability and prospects for their people when international military troops withdraw at the end of 2014. Our support will depend on the Government taking forward key governance and economic reforms, including on protecting the rights of women and girls, outlined in the Tokyo Mutual Accountability Framework (TMAF). At the request of the Government of Afghanistan, the UK agreed to co-chair the first ministerial review of the TMAF benchmarks in 2014,
	The insurgency remains a tangible threat in Afghanistan as the separate attacks in Nimruz and Kunduz provinces on 14 August demonstrated. However, as transition progresses and the ANSF increasingly move to the fore on operations, we are seeing more evidence that violent incidents are being evermore displaced away from the protected communities where the majority of Afghans live. While there are still areas where the insurgent has relative freedom of movement they are finding it hard to concentrate their forces as they would wish. It is likely that they will continue to rely on IEDs, high-profile attacks and assassination attempts as means of conducting their campaign and maintaining relevance.
	Insider attacks (incidents where members of the ANSF attack their ISAF partners) remain a serious concern. We are working with ISAF and our Afghan partners to reduce the potential for such incidents, but while being adamant that they will not derail our strategy for transition.
	The UK continued to support the development of the local economy in Helmand province. UK Aid has delivered technical and vocational education and training to more than 7,300 Helmandis, giving them the skills to get jobs and start businesses in the emerging private sector. Our assistance is also helping local government officials in Helmand take control of vital infrastructure, including roads, canals and irrigation systems.
	I am placing the report in the Library of the House. It will also be published on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website (www.fco.gov.uk).

Committee on Standards in Public Life

Lord Wallace of Saltaire: My right honourable friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office (Francis Maude) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am today announcing the start of the Triennial Review of the Committee on Standards in Public Life (CSPL). Triennial reviews of non-departmental public bodies (NDPBs) are part of the Government's commitment to ensuring that NDPBs continue to have regular challenge on their remit and governance arrangements.
	The review will be undertaken by an independent external reviewer, Peter Riddell, Director of the Institute for Government, who will want to consult widely with relevant stakeholders, including Parliament, the devolved Administrations, the main political parties, academics, ethics regulators and others with an interest in the work of the Committee. He will be issuing an Issues and Questions Paper in due course and the findings of the review will be published. Peter will be supported in the review by the Cabinet Office. At his request, he will not be paid for his time.
	In common with all such reviews, Peter Riddell will undertake the following:
	to challenge the continuing need for this NDPB-both its functions and form; and;
	if it is agreed that it should remain as an NDPB, to review its control and governance arrangements to ensure that it is complying with recognised principles of good corporate governance.
	The aim will be to complete the review in the autumn.

Communities and Local Government: Research

Baroness Hanham: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Don Foster) made the following Written Ministerial Statement on 18 September 2012.
	Today my department is publishing the 13th group of reports presenting the findings from research projects commissioned by the previous Administration. This Administration inherited a significant backlog of unpublished reports that were commissioned by the previous Government which we have been publishing in groups themed on a particular topic. The reports and findings are of general policy interest, but do not relate to forthcoming policy announcements. We are publishing these documents in the interests of transparency and as part of our Freedom of Information commitment to publish the results of all commissioned research.
	The 16 reports published today represent the findings from 15 research projects at a total cost of £1,453,505. These findings cover the topics of building, planning and the environment.
	Planning reports
	(i) Evaluation of minerals policy statements (2 volumes). This report by the British Geological Survey considered the implementation of a number of the Minerals Policy Statements and Minerals Policy Guidance notes, and evaluated the impacts of the policy's implementation. This report was commissioned in January 2010 at a cost of £60,000.
	(ii) Investigating the influence of settlement pattern and morphology on the sterilisation of shallow coal resources. This report by the British Geological Survey assessed the impact on shallow coal resources of using separation zones around urban areas. This report was commissioned in January 2010 at a cost of £9,000.
	(iii) Research to understand the rural impacts of Regional Spatial Strategies. This report by Land Use Consultants noted that the Regional Strategies were not rural-proofed, had an urban-centred approach and planned housing provision in rural areas was on a declining trend. This report was commissioned in 2009 at a cost of £21,542.
	(iv) A quality local development management service. The last Government's Killian Pretty Report recommended that Government should review the then existing national planning indicator (National Indicator 157) on timeliness for progressing planning applications and proposed a new satisfaction with the planning application service indicator. There was concern from applicants, local planning authorities and others that the performance regime focused on the eight-week and 13-week timescale targets had unintended effects on behaviours and outcomes. In response the Department commissioned research into alternatives. The research report by Addison & Associates with Arup recommended monitoring 37 different indicators. This report was commissioned in November 2009 at a cost of £72,816.
	(v) A tool to assess the Impact of EU Directives on UK Sub National Planning Policies (2 reports). This research by Ove Arup aimed to develop a tool to assess the impact of future EU directives on national planning policies. Directives used in developing this tool included the Marine Strategy Directive, the Water Framework Directive and the Habitats Directive. It noted that EU Directives create significant tensions with the need for development to meet demand. The Marine Strategy Directive would cost key business sectors between £439 million to £1.2 billion in additional costs. The research was commissioned in 2009 at a cost of £81,025.
	Building and the environment reports
	(vi) Mapping the standard of existing stock and its turnover. This report by Building Research Establishment considered the work to develop a model of the existing housing stock in England and Wales, which could be used in assessing the impact of current and future policy in relation to energy use, carbon emissions and water consumption. This report was commissioned in 2008 at a cost of £56,305.
	(vii) Case studies of change of use of dwellings. This report by Faber Maunsell looked at achieving satisfactory acoustic performance for buildings to be converted from industry or commercial use to residential use. Although sound insulation was the main concern of this project, all other relevant requirements of the Building Regulations were to be considered and methods of compliance outlined. This report was commissioned in 2003 at a cost of £115,860.
	(viii) Lessons from Stamford Brook: Understanding the gap between designed and real performance. This report by Leeds Metropolitan University conveyed the results of a research designed to evaluate the extent to which low carbon housing standards could be achieved in a large commercial housing development and incorporated into future Building Regulations. The report was commissioned in 2002 and the department's contribution was £215,000.
	(ix) The safety of stairs investigated over a range of rise and goings. This report by Building Research Establishment considered people's use of stairs. It conducted analysis of subjective opinions, objective behaviour on stairs and foot placement data to establish the effect of guidance within Part K (Protection from falling, collision and impact) on the design of public, private and institutional stairs and the risk of falling. The report was commissioned in 2003 at a cost of £219,682.
	(x) Investigation of real fires. This report by the Building Research Establishment provided feedback on the performance of real buildings in real fires. The findings noted the overall effectiveness of the Building Regulations in providing for the safety of life in the event of fire and most of the significant issues that have been identified during this study fell outside the scope of these regulations. The report was commissioned in 2007 at a cost of £241,067.
	(xi) Modelling the current and potential accessibility of the housing stock. This report by Building Research Establishment considered the accessibility of the existing housing stock in England with particular reference to its utility for older and disabled people. The report uses data from the English Housing Condition Survey to identify the frequency and suitability of a range of built features within homes to arrive at an overall assessment of their accessibility and future adaptability. The report was commissioned in 2006 at a cost of £56,305.
	(xii) Future administration of the Energy Performance Buildings Directive Quality Assurance regime. The objective of the work was to set the long-term standards and quality assurance arrangements for the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (regime and infrastructure, including Accreditation Schemes and energy assessors) to ensure that robust, repeatable and accurate Energy Performance Certificates, Display Energy Certificates and Air Conditioning Reports were produced in a consistent manner. It was commissioned in June 2009 at a cost of £75,280.
	(xiii) Review of the impact of the draft European Basic safety standard Directive on Building Regulations. This report by the Building Research Establishment examines the implications of the proposed European ionising radiation Basic Safety Standard Directive for Building Regulations. This research was commissioned in February 2010 at a cost of £24,829.
	(xiv) Glazing under abnormal loads. This report by Buro Happold and the Building Research Establishment addressed the issue of abnormal loads on glazing and the response of glazing systems. The research was commissioned in particular to examine the role of building regulations in mitigating the risks involved from abnormal loads on glazing. It reviewed structural assessment methods currently used to design buildings with glazed systems and assess their adequacy in the area of abnormal loadings. This work was commissioned in October 2003 at a cost of £157,052.
	(xv) Safety of Masonry Parapets. The overall aim of this project was to determine and analyse the most common structural problems associated with masonry parapets and the potential hazards and dangers that may arise. Having identified the problems, conclusions and recommendations require to be made regarding measures that ought to be taken in the specification, design, construction and maintenance of masonry parapets to ensure that they remained safe and structurally sound over the service life of the building. This work was commissioned in October 2003 and cost £61,212.
	(xvi) Radon: Current and Future Performance of Radon Protective Measures. This report by the Building Research Establishment (BRE) reviews the performance of radon protective measures in new buildings. The research notes that radon protection measures installed 20 years continue to provide a high degree of radon protection, and were not adversely affected by improvements such as extensions, conservatories, double glazing or insulation. This work was commissioned in February 2010 at a cost of £53,505.
	These reports and findings are of general policy interest, but do not relate to forthcoming policy announcements and are not necessarily a reflection of the current Government's policies and priorities. Copies of these reports are available on the Department for Communities and Local Government website. Copies have been placed in the Library of the House.

Elections: Police and Crime Commissioners

Lord Wallace of Saltaire: My right honourable friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office (Francis Maude) made the following Written Ministerial Statement on 18 September 2012.
	Guidance has today been issued to civil servants in UK departments on the principles which they should observe in relation to the conduct of government business in the run-up to the elections for police and crime commissioner roles in England and Wales outside London. The elections will take place on 15 November 2012.
	The guidance sets out the need to maintain the political impartiality of the Civil Service and the need to ensure that public resources are not used for party-political purposes. The period of sensitivity preceding the elections starts on 25 October.
	Copies of the guidance have been placed in the Libraries of the House and on the Cabinet Office website at www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/election-guidance.

EU: Proceeds of Crime

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Crime Prevention (Jeremy Browne) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	Following the debate in the House of Commons on 12 June the Government decided not to opt in at this stage to the Draft Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the freezing and confiscation of proceeds of crime in the European Union (European Union Document No. 7641/12).
	The Government welcome the overall aims of the Directive and recognise the benefits of increased international co-operation to recover assets held overseas. However, having analysed the contents of the Directive, and consulted with policy and operational partners, the Government identified a number of issues with the Directive, including a serious problem with Article 5 of the Directive which introduces provisions on non-conviction based confiscation in limited circumstances.
	The UK has strong powers which are successfully used to tackle criminal finances. Our powers are already compliant with or stronger than many of those contained in the Directive. As the Directive offers no direct benefit and the risk to our domestic regime posed by Article 5 is sufficiently serious, we decided that the best course of action is not to opt in at this stage.
	We will take a full part in the negotiations on the Directive and will seek to shape it in the national interest before carefully considering the case for a post-adoption opt-in.

European Stability Mechanism

Baroness Warsi: My honourable friend the Minister of State for Europe (David Lidington) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	On 12 September the German Constitutional Court announced its decision not to grant temporary injunctions relating to the proposed ratification in Germany of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) Treaty, the Fiscal Compact and the Decision amending Article 136 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. We welcome the Court's decision, which will allow the German Government to proceed with its ratification of the ESM Treaty and the Article 136 amendment Decision.
	The Court added caveats to its decision: first that the Bundestag must be fully involved in the relevant decisions and give formal approval to use of the ESM; second that there should be a ceiling for German liability of €190m and that this cannot be increased without the Bundestag's approval; and third that the requirement of professional secrecy imposed on the Members of the ESM should not prevent the Bundestag from being kept fully informed on ESM decision-making processes.
	During the Committee stage of the EU (Approval of Treaty Amendment Decision) Bill I referenced the anticipated 12 September German Constitutional Court decision, stating that it related only to whether the ESM treaty and the Fiscal Compact are compatible with the German constitution [Official Report, 10 September 2012; col. 63]. To clarify this, the ruling was in relation to six separate cases brought before the Constitutional Court. These cases were directed primarily against the ESM, which, it was contended, would among other things jeopardise the constitutionally guaranteed right of the Bundestag to control the budget and the use of taxpayers' money, and would turn a stability union into a transfer union. They also dealt with the Fiscal Compact and, in two of the cases, the Decision amending Article 136 TFEU to which the Constitutional Court gave the go-ahead to ratification without conditions.
	The Government's position on the ESM remains. The ESM alone will not solve the eurozone crisis, but will play an important role, providing the eurozone with a permanent financial assistance mechanism to assist eurozone Member States in financial difficulty. And financial stability in the eurozone is crucial to our own economic recovery in the UK.

Fuel Poverty

Baroness Verma: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change (Edward Davey) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	In March 2012, Professor John Hills from the London School of Economics published his final report into the issue of fuel poverty in which he recommended that the Government move away from the current definition of fuel poverty, which he argued was not fit for purpose. At the time we committed to moving to a new framework for measurement and consulting on that approach. Today I am laying before Parliament a consultation which seeks views on the approach we intend to take.
	On the definition of fuel poverty, I intend to adopt the overall framework that Professor Hills proposed in his Review. I believe that this is a better measure of the problem of fuel poverty than the indicator we are currently using because it will allow us to properly understand the problem, and therefore design effective solutions. By adopting a more accurate measure, this will help us to target our resources at those most in need.
	The consultation also considers the question of implications of a change to the definition for the fuel poverty target which is set out the Warm Homes and Energy Conservation Act. The definition of fuel poverty that we are proposing to adopt is a relative one, while the target is focused on eradication as far as reasonably practicable by 2016. The consultation therefore also seeks views on whether, in changing the definition, we should also seek to align the target with this new understanding of the problem.
	Finally, I am also announcing my intention to publish an updated strategy in the New Year, which will set out the final decision on the new definition of fuel poverty, our intentions on the target and will be an opportunity to set out a refreshed plan for tackling fuel poverty, to ensure we the Government are using their resources as effectively as possible.
	The consultation will run until 30 November, and I will set out the Government's response with our intention on each of the issues as soon as possible after the consultation has concluded.
	Meanwhile we will continue to deliver policies that we know are making a difference, through the Warm Home discount scheme requiring energy suppliers to provide support to low income and vulnerable customers with their energy costs, and the new Energy Company Obligation, which will run in parallel the Green Deal, and is intended to focus particularly on households that cannot achieve financial savings without additional support, including the poorest and most vulnerable, and those in hard to treat homes.

Legal Aid

Lord McNally: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Jeremy Wright) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	During Commons Consideration of Lords Amendments stage of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Bill, the Government undertook (17 April 2012, col. 226) to consider whether to extend legal aid for advice and assistance to welfare benefits cases in the First-tier Tribunal where these involved a point of law. The vast majority of Tribunal appeals do not involve points of law, but the Government said that where these could be identified by an independent person it would consider making legal aid available.
	Having considered the matter carefully, the Government consider that a system of independent verification is not feasible. But it will make available, subject to merits and means tests being satisfied, legal aid in the form of advice and assistance for those welfare benefit cases in the First-tier Tribunal where the First-tier Tribunal has itself identified an error of law in its own decision.
	Under tribunal rules, when the First-tier Tribunal receives an application for permission to appeal, it must first consider whether to review its own decision. The Tribunal may only undertake a review of its decision if it is satisfied that there was an error of law in the decision. If the Tribunal reviews its decision, it may invite representations from parties as part of that review. Alternatively, it may take action as a result of the review (in effect, to change its earlier decision) without first giving every party an opportunity to make representations; in that case any party that did not have an opportunity to make representations may apply for such action to be set aside and for the decision to be reviewed again.
	Legal aid will be available to assist appellants in these two situations: to make representations when invited by the Tribunal, and in relation to an application for action to be set aside and for the decision to be reviewed again where representations were not sought. We intend in due course to lay an Order under section 9 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, for approval by each House, to reflect this position.
	The Legal Services Commission intends to begin a tender for welfare benefits work in 2013. The tender will cover the work described above, and advice and assistance for onward appeals on a point of law in the Upper Tribunal, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court as described in paragraph 8 of Part 1 of Schedule 1 to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. One of the criteria for awarding contracts in this tender will be price competition.
	The indicative timetable for the welfare benefits contract is:
	Pre-Qualification Questionnaire Stage: February 2013
	Invitation to Tender: May 2013
	Contract commencement: October 2013
	Existing welfare benefit contracts are due to expire in March 2013. In order to ensure that advice and assistance will be provided for welfare benefit cases within the scope of legal aid, we will put in place appropriate interim measures from April 2013.

Local Statistics

Baroness Hanham: My right honourable Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (Eric Pickles) made the following Written Ministerial Statement on 18 September 2012.
	I would like to update honourable Members on changes to the publication of the department's statistics. Today my department has announced its response to the consultation on proposed changes to the department's statistics. From October this year, we will no longer publish statistics at a government office regional level. Instead the department will plan to publish, where appropriate, statistics for Local Enterprise Partnerships and upper-tier local authorities, complementing existing statistics by local authority.
	The coalition Government have abolished regional government. The unelected Regional Assemblies/Regional Chambers, the Government Offices for the Regions, the Regional FireControl programme and the Regional Development Agencies have been terminated, as is intended for the Regional Spatial Strategies, subject to the strategic environment assessment process outlined in my statement of 3 September 2012, Official Report, Column 5WS.
	The government office regions were an inefficient tier of administration based on arbitrary boundaries. They did not reflect the areas that local residents most identified with, nor were they areas with common economic problems and market conditions, nor were they the most sensible boundaries for coordinating functions such as fire and resilience.
	The continuing use of the former government office regional boundaries no longer provides a coherent framework for assessing public policy. Many of the Government's policies now use alternative local geographies, for example Local Enterprise Partnerships, the New Homes Bonus and City Deals. Publishing statistics at a regional level is no longer necessary or informative, and we see little point in producing statistics at taxpayers' expense for their own sake.
	The old regional classifications are also misleading-they fail to quantify both the pockets of deprivation that can exist within regions or the differences between rural and urban England, and there is an inconsistency of approach to the size and population of each government region. They are arbitrary lines on a map that have no resonance-in contrast to England's longstanding cities, boroughs and counties which have a real sense of local identity and popular support, dating back centuries in many cases. England has no history of regional government, whereas it does have a great tradition of local governance that this Government wish to strengthen.
	There is also a European dimension to the regions in the form of Eurostat's Nomenclature of Units for Territorial Statistics standard (the appropriately named 'NUTS Regulations'). It is the view of Ministers that the NUTS1 hierarchy is no longer appropriate for Structural Funds in England moving forward from 2014. Ministers reject the notion of a 'Europe of the Regions' where nation-states and national Parliaments are sidelined, and replaced with distant regional governments answerable only to a federal European super-state. Dismantling such arbitrary, unelected regional administrative structures will assist in that goal.
	Ministers have carefully considered all the representations made in the consultation. I would note that, for the purposes of historic comparisons, nothing prevents academics and other interested parties from compiling and analysing the open local authority data by the old regional government boundaries, if they wish.
	The consultation response also notes the implementation of a new form on local authority housing statistics which reduces and rationalises the data we are asking local authorities to provide, reducing burdens on local government. It also reports on the responses on Land Use Change Statistics which confirmed their importance for monitoring the outcomes of planning policy. A copy of the response has been placed in the Library of the House.

Olympic Truce

Baroness Warsi: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr Mark Simmonds) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement:
	I wish to inform the House about the Government's work on responding to the UN General Assembly's Resolution on the Olympic Truce of October 2011.
	It was a real honour for the UK to have the responsibility to promote the Olympic Truce message. We worked closely on delivering an international response to the Olympic Truce, working with the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games, the Department for International Development, the Ministry of Defence and the Department for Culture Media and Sport.
	On 17 October 2011, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office secured unanimous co-sponsorship, by all 193 United Nations Member States, for a UN General Assembly Resolution on the Olympic Truce entitled "Building a peaceful and better world through sport and the Olympic ideal". Since then we have taken the conflict prevention and peace ideals of the UN Resolution internationally as part of our diplomatic work to build stability overseas.
	The UN Resolution calls upon UN Member States to undertake concrete actions at local, national, and international levels to promote and strengthen a culture of peace. The unanimous co-sponsorship of the Resolution afforded an important foundation for the UK to work in partnership with a broad range of international actors that included governments, parliamentarians, National Olympic Committees, the UN and civil society, including faith groups and NGOs.
	We wanted to show that the UN Resolution could be translated into international action. Our diplomatic missions across our network and the FCO in London arranged over 70 events and activities which showed how important the contribution of youth, women and those with disabilities is in promoting peace through sport, culture, education and wider public engagement. Whilst activities took place in every continent, we specifically wanted to bring the Olympic Truce to life in conflict affected and fragile countries.
	For example, in Sri Lanka we hosted a Paralympic style sports day for disabled soldiers, disabled ex-LTTE combatants and disabled civilians. Sport demonstrated its mediating influence, bringing together former adversaries to understand each others' perspectives, embracing diversity and encouraging inclusivity. In Khartoum we brought together young people from different communities in Sudan and South Sudan, specifically refugees and residents from Darfur met to play in a football tournament, which supported ongoing work to create a youth football league. In Mindanao, in the Philippines, we co-hosted with the Zamboanga City Government and Zamboanga Football Association "Time out for football", a football tournament and clinic bringing people together from a diverse range of communities, bridging gaps between Christians and Muslims. In Armenia, Pakistan and Trinidad and Tobago, children portrayed what the Olympic Truce means to them through art.
	As the Foreign Secretary said when speaking at the International Paralympic Inclusion Summit on 6 September, "We wanted to create a legacy that would last a lifetime. On top of the Government's financial and political commitment to conflict prevention and poverty reduction, we decided to mobilise the ideals of the Olympic Truce."
	The UK is the first Games host to deliver this level of international ambition for the Olympic Truce. The UN Secretary-General, in the presence of the International Olympic Committee, recognised the UK's Olympic Truce work on the eve of the Opening Ceremony of the London 2012 Games. Now others are seeking to build on our experience. We are currently sharing our experience with the UN Secretary-General's Special Adviser's Office on Sport and Development for Peace, as well as with Russia, which will next take stewardship of the Olympic Truce in 2013, ahead of the Sochi Winter Games in 2014. This level of international interest, paired with our continued engagement, will help cement our legacy of encouraging future Games hosts to promote the ideals of the Olympic Truce in their own ways.

Planning: Penfold Review

Earl Attlee: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Stephen Hammond) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	Today I am publishing an interim response to the consultation that closed on 24 August detailing proposals to streamline the process of applying for the stopping up or diversion of a highway, where this is required for the purpose of property development.
	This interim response is considering only option 1 of the consultation. The remaining options and consultation responses will be considered and a full response, including proposals for a way forward, will be published by the end of November.
	The foundation of all three of the main policy options is a speeding up of the process by allowing stopping up and planning applications to run concurrently, namely option 1.
	The large majority of respondents, comprising three main groups, namely developers, local authorities and those affected by stopping up decisions, gave broad support for allowing stopping up and planning applications to be made concurrently, with agreement that it would speed up the process and reduce burdens. We will seek an early legislative opportunity to implement this change.
	The Government committed to improving the stopping-up application process in the 2011 Autumn Statement and this will help to deliver the Government's growth agenda, by removing unnecessary burdens faced by businesses, speeding up the application process and removing unnecessary bureaucracy. The change will play a useful role in encouraging investment and therefore growth in local communities.
	This interim response to the consultation document will be available in the Libraries of both Houses and on the department's website.

Railways: High Speed Rail

Earl Attlee: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	The Government's decision on 10th January 2012 to take forward proposals for a national high speed rail network followed a major public consultation exercise that attracted around 55,000 responses.
	The decision to proceed took account of a range of evidence including analysis by my department and High Speed Two Ltd of issues raised in consultation as well as comments from a wide variety of interested parties through a range of engagement approaches. The Government's independent response analysis consultants, Dialogue by Design (DbyD), carried out a detailed analysis of the consultation responses and a summary of their analysis was published alongside the Government's January decision, with an addendum report published in July:
	High Speed Rail: Investing in Britain's Future-Consultation Summary Report, available at www.dft .gov.uk/publications/hs2-consultation-summary/
	High Speed Rail: Investing in Britain's Future-Addendum, available at www.dft.gov.uk/publications/high-speed-rail-addendum/.
	Since publishing the Addendum report in July, it has become apparent that a further very small proportion of responses were not fully analysed by DbyD. For these responses, the answers to one or more of the seven consultation questions were omitted from DbyD's analysis. In total, approximately 0.4% of answers provided to individual consultation questions were affected.
	The table below shows how many of the seven consultation answers were omitted from the analysis in each case:
	
		
			 Number of question responses not analysed Number of respondents 
			 1 520 
			 2 130 
			 3 44 
			 4 14 
			 5 7 
			 6 2 
			 7 5 
		
	
	The cause has been identified as technical errors in transferring data captured from online consultation responses to the consultation analysis database held by DbyD.
	My department asked for supplementary analysis from DbyD and this work concludes that the responses "do not provide any information that was not already included in the previous Consultation Summary Report or would have made a difference to the substantive content or balance of that report". Inclusion in the original analysis would not have changed the substance of DbyD's findings, nor affected the considerations which informed the decisions following the consultation.
	All those who submitted the responses affected will be contacted with details of their particular cases.

Schools: Exam Reform

Lord Hill of Oareford: My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove) has made the following Statement.
	With your permission, Mr Speaker, I should like to make a Statement about the future of examinations and assessment in our schools.
	The examination which the overwhelming majority of young people sit at 16-the GCSE-was designed with the best of intentions. It sought to broaden the numbers engaging in academic study and prepare for an expansion of further and higher education.
	In the years since it was established we have undoubtedly seen improvements in our education system, and those responsible-heads, teachers, parents, students and reformers like Kenneth Baker and Andrew Adonis-deserve our praise.
	But the GCSE was conceived and designed for a different age and a different world-a time before majority participation in higher education, a world where information technology was in its infancy. When the GCSE was first taught the school leaving age was still 16, state-planned economies dominated half the globe and the internet was a work of science fiction.
	Now that we are raising the education participation age to 18, now that nations which were slow developers 20 years ago are outstripping us economically, and now that ways of learning have been so dramatically transformed in all our lifetimes, it is right that we reform our examination system.
	Because we know that the old model-the 80s model -is no longer right for now. We know that the record increases in performance at GCSE have not been matched by the same level of improvement in learning-while pass rates have soared we have fallen down the international education league tables.
	We know that employers and academics have become less confident in the worth of GCSE passes-they fear students lack the skills for the modern workplace and the knowledge for advanced study.
	We know that children's achievements are not properly recognised, with even the honourable Member for West Derby, an Education Minister in the last Labour Government, admitting under duress that there was grade inflation under that Government.
	And we know, most recently and most tellingly, that changes made to GCSEs under the last Government, specifically the introduction of modules and the expansion of coursework in schools, further undermined the credibility of exams, leaving young people without the rigorous education they deserved.
	Only last week the OECD reported that in the years up until 2010 our education system still had not been reformed enough to keep pace with the best in the world.
	Critical to reform is ending an exam system that has narrowed the curriculum, forced idealistic professionals to teach to the test and encouraged heads to offer children the softest possible options.
	It is time for the race to the bottom to end. It is time to tackle grade inflation and dumbing down. It is time to raise aspirations and restore rigour to our examinations.
	We have already taken steps to improve vocational qualifications. Following on from the Wolf review we have ensured there is proper assessment, more rigorous content and tighter quality controls on vocational courses. And we are reforming post-16 funding to improve the education of those taking vocational courses.
	Today marks the next stage in radical exam reform, to equip children for the 21st century and allow us to compete with the best performing education nations.
	We want to ensure modules-which encourage bite-size learning and spoon-feeding, teaching to the test and gaming of the system-go, once and for all.
	We want to remove controlled assessment and coursework from core subjects. These assessment methods have, in all too many cases, corrupted the fair testing of all students. We want to ensure that children are tested transparently on what they and they alone can do at the end of years of deep learning. Where individual practical work needs to be assessed, we will be flexible. But we cannot have a system where some students enjoy an inbuilt and unfair advantage over others because of the exam design.
	We also want to end the current two-tier division of exams into foundation and higher tiers which condemn thousands of students to courses which place a cap on aspiration
	And, critically, we will end the competition between exam boards which has led to a race to the bottom with different boards offering easier courses or assistance to teachers in a corrupt effort to massage up pass rates.
	We will invite exam boards to offer wholly new qualifications in the core subject areas-English, maths, the sciences, history, geography and languages.
	In each subject area only one exam board will offer the new exams. Ofqual, as the independent exams regulator, will assess all the exams put forward by the exams boards. From those which Ofqual accept, the winner will be the board which offers the course which best meets the criteria, benchmarked to the world's best, informed by academic expertise, and capable of both recognising exceptional performance and allowing the overwhelming majority of students to have their work recognised and graded fairly.
	We plan to call these new qualifications-in these core academic subjects-English Baccalaureate Certificates, recognising that they are the academic foundation which is the secure base on which further study, vocational learning or a satisfying apprenticeship can be built. Success in English, maths, the sciences, a humanities subject and a language will mean the student has the full English Baccalaureate.
	Some will argue that more rigorous qualifications in these subjects will inevitably lead to more students failing. But we believe that fatalism is indicative of a dated mind-set-one that believes in fixed abilities that great teaching can do little to change.
	And we know that great teaching is changing lives even as we speak. We have the best generation of teachers and head teachers we have ever had. Their excellence combined with reforms and improvements to education that this Government are making through improved teacher training, greater freedoms for head teachers and the growth of academies and free schools means more students will be operating at a higher level.
	So even as exams become more rigorous, more students will be equipped to clear this higher bar. Indeed, we are explicitly ambitious for all our children and we believe that over time we will catch up with the highest performing nations and a higher proportion of children will clear the bar than now.
	We expect that everyone who now sits a GCSE should sit this new qualification. But of course there will be some students who will find it difficult to sit these exams, just as there are students who do not sit GCSEs today. We will make special, indeed enhanced, provision for these students with their schools required to produce a detailed record of their achievement in each curriculum area at 16 which will help them make progress subsequently-and we anticipate some will secure EBacc Certificates at the age of 17 or 18.
	These reforms are radical and so we will consult widely. Their introduction will require careful preparation. So we propose first teaching of new certificates in English, maths and the sciences in September 2015 with other subjects following.
	And to ensure that the benefits of this more rigorous approach to the English Baccalaureate subjects are felt across the whole curriculum, we will ask Ofqual to consider how these new higher standards can be used as a template for judging and accrediting a new suite of qualifications, beyond these subjects to replace current GCSEs.
	These changes will also require us to consider afresh how we hold schools accountable, so we will consult widely on replacements for existing league tables-and we are determined to have even better ways of recognising schools which add value and help the poorest and to recognise the best vocational as well as academic qualifications.
	After years of drift, decline and dumbing down, at last we are reforming our examination system to compete with the world's best.
	Just as we were left with a legacy of mismanagement, poor incentives and wasted talent in economic policy by the last Government and this coalition is turning the economy round, so we were left the same legacy in our examination system and this coalition is now modernising our exam system so we can have truly rigorous exams, competitive with the best in the world, making opportunity more equal for every child.
	That is why I commend these reforms to the House.

Transport: Devolving Local Major Schemes

Earl Attlee: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Norman Baker) has made the following Ministerial Statement.
	Earlier this year we launched a consultation paper setting out options for how we should devolve funding and prioritisation of local major transport schemes following this Spending Review period.
	Transport is vitally important to local economies, and new infrastructure can provide the missing links that are often so crucial in getting economies moving and creating opportunities for new investment and employment.
	We want to ensure that decisions on new transport infrastructure are made more efficiently, and at a more local level than previously. Local Enterprise Partnerships are well placed to understand how transport investment can be used to boost economic recovery and growth and that is why we want them, working with Local Authorities, to have a key role. Indeed more government funding was announced yesterday for Local Enterprise Partnerships to boost their ability to contribute to the growth and jobs agenda.
	I am pleased to say that our consultation proposals were met with approval from the majority of respondents, particularly Local Authorities and Local Enterprise Partnerships. A summary of the responses received was published in July. I have today published firm proposals, confirming that, in all of the key areas, the department will proceed on the basis as set out in the consultation paper.
	I fully support the key objective of removing Whitehall from the process of making decisions on which local schemes should or should not go ahead. However we have a responsibility to ensure that the new local decision makers have arrangements in place to achieve the value for money that we know the right schemes can deliver and to take account of other important factors such as environmental impact. Most respondents accepted the need for robust local assurance frameworks and we will shortly publish detailed guidance on this, to enable local areas to submit their draft frameworks by December.
	Transparency is also essential, to ensure that priorities are widely publicised and understood and can be effectively shaped by local people that have a key interest in them. Evaluation will also assume an even greater importance, to enable all parties to look critically at whether key outcomes were achieved and to learn lessons for future investment decisions.
	We have asked local areas to confirm the geographical basis for their local transport bodies by 28 September. When they have done so I will set out indicative funding levels that each area should use as a planning assumption. I can confirm that the distribution of funding between different areas will be on a simple per-capita basis. The total level of funding available will of course be subject to decisions made in future spending rounds.
	I look forward to working with local transport bodies over the coming months as we embark on this transition to a truly decentralised system and they begin developing their infrastructure plans for post-2015.

Zimbabwe

Baroness Warsi: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr Mark Simmonds) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement:
	Following discussions between the UK and its EU partners, the EU announced on 23 July its decision to suspend with immediate effect the restrictions on appropriate measures covering EU development assistance and indicated that it would respond to a peaceful and credible constitutional referendum in Zimbabwe with a suspension of the majority of EU restrictive measures on all but a small core of individuals around President Mugabe, particularly those who will most directly influence the potential of violence in the next election.
	This followed the EU announcement in February 2012, where 51 people and 20 companies were removed from the list of those subject to an EU visa ban and asset freeze on the grounds that they were no longer involved in human rights abuses and in recognition of progress made so far in Zimbabwe and regionally in preparation for credible and peaceful elections in Zimbabwe. In February 2011, 35 people were removed from the list following significant progress in addressing the economic crisis in Zimbabwe and improving the delivery of social services.
	There has been further progress in the last six months in Zimbabwe, including on the drafting of a new constitution; legislative progress such as the Electoral Amendment Bill and Human Rights Commission Bill being passed; and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) under the leadership of President Zuma reiterating their commitment to facilitate agreement among the parties in Zimbabwe on creating an environment conducive to the holding of free and fair elections. There have been continuing calls for the EU's restrictive measures to be suspended in order to further support the reform process including from all parties to the Inclusive Government, SADC and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
	Our aim is clear: we want to support the process towards free and fair elections in Zimbabwe. A peaceful and credible constitutional referendum would represent an important step along that path and it is right that the EU responds appropriately. The proposed move is not an endorsement of the content of the draft constitution itself but will demonstrate to reformers across the political spectrum that the EU is serious about responding to real progress on the ground and reflects our confidence in the facilitation process being undertaken by President Zuma and the leaders of SADC.
	It also puts the onus on Zimbabwe to live up to their commitments. The constitution-making process has been and continues to be, much delayed and the way forward is uncertain. The international community is monitoring developments closely. We will ensure there is a robust review process following any EU move on measures and that the EU has the ability to respond appropriately should the situation deteriorate.
	Britain remains a committed friend to the people of Zimbabwe. UK aid to Zimbabwe in the 2011-12 financial year was £89 million-our largest ever programme. The funds are being delivered through multilateral partners and civil society partners and the EU decision on Appropriate Measures has no impact on the UK aid programme. Between 2011 and 2015 UK aid to Zimbabwe will provide almost one million more people with clean water, give more than 700,000 women access to family planning, create 125,000 new jobs and help 80,000 children complete primary education.